* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR AUGUST 7TH, 2019. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? [Roll Call] FERNANDEZ HERE, FISH HERE. HARRIS GARZA. MARTINEZ FLORES CARPENTER. HERE GROUPE. HERE. BOWMAN ZER UNE HERE. [Chairman’s Statement] THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN OF THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, AND THE VICE CHAIR IS SCOTT CARPENTER. IT IS THE FUNCTION OF THE BOARD TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER AND ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY AND IN THE RIVER AND IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY. AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARD FOR REHABILITATION. THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ANY ADDITIONAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 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 OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE SIGN UP ON THE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD SHEET. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK. IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF OR REPRESENTATIVE FOR A PROJECT ON THE AGENDA, YOU'LL BE CALLED ON AS THE CASE IS CALLED OTHER THAN CASE REPRESENTATIVE. SPEAKERS FOR OR OPPOSED TO AN AGENDA ITEM WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES SPEAKING TIME PER SPEAKER. CITIZENS MAY ALSO SIGN UP TO YIELD THEIR THREE MINUTES TO ANOTHER SPEAKER WHO IS SIGNED UP FOR A MAXIMUM TIME OF NINE MINUTES. ANYONE WHO IS YIELDING THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AT THE TIME. A SPEAKER'S CALLED UPON SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE SIGNED UP. APPLICANTS WILL BE GIVEN NO MORE THAN 20 MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR CASE WITH AN ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. 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 READY WITHIN 10 DAYS AND WILL BE MAILED AND AVAILABLE TO BE PICKED UP IN PERSON AT THE HISTORIC COUNTER LOCATED ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THIS BUILDING. NO WORK OF ANY TYPE IS TO BE STARTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS. AFTER A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AT THIS TIME, PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES. [Announcements] WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. WE DO HAVE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. UM, THE FIRST WE DO HAVE TRANSLATION SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR THE MEETING. UM, EDWARD, IF YOU COULD ROLL THE VIDEO PLEASE. THANK YOU. UM, AND SO YOU'VE ALSO NOTICED THAT WE HAVE NEW EQUIPMENT IN THE ROOM. UM, THAT IS BECAUSE WE ARE NOW RECORDING AND LIVE STREAMING ALL THE MEETINGS, UM, FROM THIS STATE MOVING FORWARD, WHICH IS EXCITING. UM, THE MEETINGS WILL BE ARCHIVED ONLINE AND AVAILABLE IN BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH. UM, SO IT'S EXTRA POINT IMPORTANT FOR COMMISSIONERS AND OUR APPLICANTS AND CITIZENS TO BE HEARD WHEN THEY SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE TO MAKE SURE IT'S LOUD AND CLEAR FOR THE RECORDING. UM, A QUICK STAFF ANNOUNCEMENT. UM, ADAM, ER, UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY HIS LAST H D R C MEETING WITH US. HE'S NOT LEAVING O H P, SO HE'S BEEN PROMOTED, SO IT'S GOOD. UM, SO HE'S GONNA BE, UH, THE NEW SENIOR MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR FOR OUR LIVING HERITAGE AT VACANT BUILDINGS PROGRAM. SO WE'RE HAPPY TO SEE HIM MOVE UP. CONGRATULATIONS. NEXT, WE ALSO HAVE, UM, JENNY HAY. JENNY IS THE, UM, SENIORS, UH, EXCUSE ME, SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER OVER OUR SCOUTS, A PROGRAM. UM, YOU MAY RECALL AT THE, UM, PREVIOUS MEETING THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT POTENTIAL EXPANSION OF THE, UM, TOBIN HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND FIRST WE WERE ASKED TO, UM, DO A SURVEY AND LOOK AT, UH, WHAT AREAS MIGHT BE ELIGIBLE. SO JENNY HAS AN UPDATE FOR THIS. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. I'M JENNY HAYES. COREY HAS INTRODUCED ME. THANK YOU. UM, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON OUR PROGRESS. UM, AT OUR, UH, LAST MEETING, UM, YOU DIRECTED STAFF TO START THE SURVEY OF THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, UH, WITH THE GOAL OF IDENTIFYING WHETHER THERE ARE ADDITIONAL POTENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS, UM, OR, UM, PERHAPS THE POTENTIAL TO EXPAND THE CURRENT TOBIN HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. SO, UM, STAFF HAS DONE THAT. UH, WE IDENTIFIED THAT WITHIN THAT COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOUNDARY, THERE ARE, UM, JUST A FEW OVER 1300 PARCELS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC. SO IT'S A, A PRETTY BIG, UM, UM, CHUNK FOR US. SO, UM, LAST MONTH WE WERE ABLE TO SURVEY ABOUT A THIRD OF THOSE, ABOUT 450 OF THEM. UM, WE, THIS IS JUST A WINDSHIELD SURVEY. THIS IS NOT [00:05:01] OUR SORT OF FULL RECON SURVEY. SO I'LL TELL YOU WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR. WE'RE TAKING A PHOTO OF THE STRUCTURE. WE ARE LOOKING FOR THE APPROXIMATE YEAR THAT IT WAS BUILT, UM, USING BOTH, UH, INITIALLY BEXAR COUNTY DATA, WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS SUSPECT, BUT THEN VERIFYING THAT WITH THE CITY DIRECTORIES. UM, WE ARE IDENTIFYING WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD CONSIDER THIS STRUCTURE TO BE A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IF IT WERE WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT IF YOU HAVE ANY. UM, AND THEN WE'RE ALSO IDENTIFYING, UH, JUST FROM A, A VISUAL WHETHER WE THINK THAT THERE MIGHT BE THE POTENTIAL FOR, UM, AN INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION, UM, FOR EACH PROPERTY. SO, UM, UH, AS I SAID, WE WERE ABLE TO GET THROUGH ABOUT A THIRD OF THAT TOTAL AREA, ABOUT 450 STRUCTURES IS WHAT WE SURVEYED. OF THOSE, ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF THEM WE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING. SO IF THEY WERE IN A DISTRICT, WE WOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THEM CONTRIBUTING. AND AGAIN, ASK QUESTIONS 'CAUSE I'M, UM, I'M SURE THAT THERE ARE, THERE MAY BE SOME CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY THAT MEANS. UM, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE ON, OBVIOUSLY, AND FINISH THE, THE SECOND TWO THIRDS OF THIS, UM, OF THIS SURVEY. I SUSPECT WE WILL NOT FINISH IT BEFORE YOUR NEXT HEARING, BUT PERHAPS THE ONE AFTER THAT. BUT WE'LL CONTINUE TO GIVE YOU PROGRESS UPDATES AS WE MOVE FORWARD. OF THE THREE QUARTERS OF THE FOUR 50, UH, THAT YOU CONSIDER MIGHT BE CONTRIBUTING, HOW MANY OF THOSE WERE POSSIBLE INDIVIDUAL LANDMARKS? WE, BETWEEN ONE AND TWO DOZEN I THINK IS WHAT WE IDENTIFIED. SO, UM, NOT, NOT A HUGE CHUNK. UM, I, I WOULD, UH, AGAIN MENTION THAT THAT'S JUST A VISUAL. SO WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE FROM THE EXTERIOR. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE STORIES HERE, UM, THAT, THAT WE'LL NEED TO DO SOME FURTHER RESEARCH TO COLLECT. AND UH, ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, I THINK PART OF YOUR DIRECTION LAST TIME WAS TO ALSO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. SO I HOPE THAT, UM, UH, IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF, UH, REPORTS I'LL BE ABLE TO SHARE WITH YOU WAYS THAT WE'VE, UM, STARTED TO DO SOME OUTREACH TO BE ABLE TO COLLECT THOSE STORIES AND IDENTIFY PLACES THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT TO THE COMMUNITY THAT MAYBE WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT YET. HOW MANY STRUCTURES ARE IN THE DESIGNATED TOBIN HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT RIGHT NOW? THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION. I'M NOT SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. COREY, DO YOU REMEMBER HOW MANY ARE IN THERE? NO. I'D HAVE TO PULL THAT NUMBER FOR YOU. I'M REALLY SORRY. OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU JANINE. UM, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY CITIZENS SIGNED UP FOR GENERAL ITEMS SO WE CAN MOVE ON TO ['A' CONSENT AGENDA] THE, UM, A GROUP OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. UM, SO IF YOU DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN, UM, WE DO HAVE SOME QUICK UPDATES. ITEM A EIGHT H C R C CASE 20 19, 4 27. UM, THAT'S FIVE 19 SOUTH PRESA HAS BEEN MOVED TO CONSENT BY THE APPLICANT. UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CITIZENS SIGNED UP FOR THAT ITEM, SO WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE IT, UM, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS. UM, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AFTER A VOTE. ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. A ITEMS A ONE THROUGH SIX AND A EIGHT WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND FOR, UH, APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES YOUR ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS 700 NORTH ST. MARY'S, 1 0 6 JEFFERSON, 1 0 7 NORTH FLORES ONE OH TWO, ONE OH SIX, ONE TEN ONE ELEVEN LABOR, AND 600 CESAR CHAVEZ, 1403 NORTH ST. MARY'S, TWO 15 WEST VALS AND FIVE 19 SOUTH PRESA. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS MEETING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED WITHIN 10 DAYS AND WILL BE EMAILED TO YOU. IF YOU HAVE NOT YET RETURNED THE PUBLIC NOTICE YARD SIGN THAT WAS PLACED ON YOUR PROPERTY, PLEASE DO SO AT THE O H P COUNTER ON THE FIRST FLOOR. OKAY, ITEM [A7 19-5808 Address/Description: 420 E HOUSTON ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-396 Historic District Name: Alamo Plaza RIO District: RIO-3 Applicant: Aaron Selinkoff/Mad Dogs Group Request: Exterior paint City Council Dist.: 1] A SEVEN A C CASE 20 19 3 96, THAT'S FOUR 20 EAST HOUSTON HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT AND WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. UM, WE DO HAVE A CITIZEN SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. UM, VIRGINIA, WOULD YOU STILL LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM OR WOULD YOU PREFER NOT TO? OKAY, SO NO ACTION IS NEEDED ON A SEVEN. MOVING [A9 19-5759 Address/Description: 517 E HOUSTON ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-365 Landmark Name: Rosenberg, Frank Building Historic District Name: Alamo Plaza Applicant: Michael Litofsky Request: Storefront Modification City Council Dist.: 1] FORWARD TO AGENDA ITEM A NINE. CASE NUMBER 20 19 365 AT FIVE 17 EAST HOUSTON. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO MODIFY A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN TO INCLUDE A GLASS STOREFRONT ON EAST HOUSTON STREET SIDE. [00:10:01] STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN AMENDMENT BASED ON FINDING C. THE APPLICANT MAY SUBMIT ANOTHER DESIGN THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES OR BASED ON HISTORIC PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW OR CONTINUE WITH THE DESIGN APPROVED IN MAY, 2015 AND AGAIN IN MAY, 2019. CASE COMMENT, THIS IS A COMPLIANCE CASE ON MAY 1ST, 2019 THE COMMISSION APPROVED THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE STOREFRONT WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE UNAPPROVED CLEAR BOARDING WITHIN 90 DAYS. AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO AMEND THE DESIGN BEFORE INITIATING CONSTRUCTION MISSIONERS. THIS ITEM WAS ON OUR LAST AGENDA AND WAS POSTPONED TO THIS AGENDA BECAUSE THE APPLICANT DID NOT ATTEND. UM, I DO NOT BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT TODAY AS WELL. UM, WE DO HAVE A CITIZEN TO BE HEARD, SO I WILL CALL UP VIRGINIA VAN LEAVE TO SPEAK. GOOD AFTERNOON, VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, 91 18 FAIRLAND AND I'M REPRESENTING THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY ON BEHALF OF OUR PRESIDENT, THE SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS WITH O H P STAFF. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE PROPOSED RENOVATIONS TO THE SALT FRANK BUILDING AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED, THE RAIL BALCONY AND GLASS STOREFRONT DISRUPT THE VERTICALITY AND CONTINUITY OF THE URGENT OF THE ORIGINAL FACADES DESIGN. THESE ALTERATIONS WILL MAR ONE OF THE FEW SMALLER SCALE EXAMPLES OF THE ART DECO STYLE DOWNTOWN. ADDITIONALLY, THIS PROPOSAL DIFFERS SUBSTANTIALLY FROM THE ONE APPROVED IN 2015, WHICH PROVIDED A MORE STYLISTICALLY COMPATIBLE DESIGN SOLUTION. THANK YOU. SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY. PATTY ZZ, PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. AND HERE COMMISSIONERS. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE. UM, THIS IS AS YOU'RE AWARE, AN ONGOING COMPLIANCE CASE AND SO I THINK WE DO RECOMMEND ACTION ON THE ITEM TODAY. SO I I AGREE WITH, UH, STAFF'S FINDINGS AND THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY POSITION ON THIS AND WHO WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH, UH, PREVIOUS DETERMINATIONS BY THIS COMMISSION. SO I MOVE FOR DENIAL. SECOND. MOTION FOR DENIAL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR UH, AUGUST 7TH, 2019. A HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN OF THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, AND THE VICE CHAIR IS SCOTT CARPENTER. IT IS A FUNCTION OF THE BOARD TO ADVISE A CITY MANAGER IN ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY AND IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARD FOR REHABILITATION. THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IN ANY ADDITIONAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 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 OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE SIGN UP ON THE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD SHEET. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK. IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF OR REPRESENTATIVE FOR A PROJECT ON THE AGENDA, YOU'LL BE CALLED ON AS THE CASE IS CALLED OTHER THAN CASE REPRESENTATIVES, SPEAKERS FOUR OR OPPOSED TO AN AGENDA ITEM WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES SPEAKING TIME PER SPEAKER. CITIZENS MAY ALSO SIGN UP TO YIELD THEIR THREE MINUTES TO ANOTHER SPEAKER WHO HAS SIGNED UP FOR A MAXIMUM TIME OF NINE MINUTES. ANYONE WHO IS YIELDING THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AT THE TIME A SPEAKER IS CALLED UPON. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE SIGNED UP. APPLICANTS WILL BE GIVEN NO MORE THAN 20 MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR CASE WITH AN ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. 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 READY WITHIN 10 DAYS AND WILL BE MAILED AND AVAILABLE TO BE PICKED UP IN PERSON AT THE HISTORIC COUNTER LOCATED ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THIS BUILDING. 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. THANK YOU. UM, WE WILL MO MOMENTARILY MOVE FORWARD TO THE BE ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. UM, FIRST WE DO HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING TRANSLATION SERVICES FOR THE MEETING. [00:15:12] THANK YOU. AND, UM, JUST FOR EVERYONE'S INFORMATION, UM, TODAY'S MEETING AND FUTURE MEETINGS IN THIS ROOM, UM, ARE LIVE STREAMING AND ALSO, UH, RECORDED FOR, UM, UH, FUTURE ACCESS. UM, SO THOSE CAN BE ACCESSED ON THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE WEBSITE. UM, AND THE VIDEOS WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE IN BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH. SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT. ['B' ITEMS CONSENT AGENDA] UM, SO ON THE SCREEN YOU HAVE THE UM, B ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. UM, I BELIEVE WE HAVE A RECUSAL FROM COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR ITEM B TWO. SO HE'S ACTUALLY GOING TO LEAVE THE ROOM FOR THE VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. UM, THE OTHER UPDATE TO THE, UM, CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM B 16 A C R CASE 20 19 3 9 8, WHICH IS 2161 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY, HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO THE NEXT AGENDA, SO WILL NOT BE INCLUDED ON ANY UM, ACTION. ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, I'D MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF UH, B ITEMS ONE THROUGH 15 AND 17 THROUGH 20 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. YOU'RE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS 8 31 LAMAR THREE 14 WEST SME PLACE 2 0 2 WEAVER EIGHT 13 BURLESON, 8 1 8 NORTH OLIVE, 2026 WEST GRAMERCY 3 0 2 LEE 3 26 LEXINGTON FOR BOTH TAX CERTIFICATION AND VERIFICATION. 4 0 2 LEE FIVE 13 EAST LOCUST, 2 0 7 LAUREL HEIGHTS, 7,400 HIGHWAY 1 51 86 0 1 TIMBER PATH 11 0 30 RUIDOSO, TWO 19 EAST GUNTHER ONE 16 BEVERLY 2 28 LAVACCA AND 1622 WEST SATCH. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS MEETING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. IF YOU HAVE NOT YET RETURNED THE PUBLIC NOTICE OR SIGN PLACED ON THE PROPERTY, PLEASE DO SO AT THE O H P COUNTER ON THE FIRST FLOOR. AND [Citizens to be Heard] BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I NEED TO APOLOGIZE TO BARBARA GARCIA. SHE SIGNED IN, UM, AS ASSISTANT TO BE HEARD ON GENERAL ITEMS AND SO I WILL CALL HER UP AT THIS TIME BEFORE WE MOVE ANY FURTHER. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS BARBARA GARCIA. I LIVE AT 9 32 NORTH PINE STREET IN DIG WITTY HILL, AND I'M SPEAKING FOR THE DIG HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED FOR TODAY'S CASES. THE D H N A BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONCURS WITH OUR FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS. THE OFFICIAL D H N A LETTER IS IN THE CASE FILES, UH, AND SIGNED BY D'S VICE PRESIDENT. IN CONSIDERATION OF EVERYONE'S TIME, WE HAVE CON CONSOLIDATED OUR ASSESSMENTS AND COMMENTS AS FOLLOWS, CASES, UH, THAT THE COMMITTEE SUPPORTS AS PRESENTED, AND I'M SORRY, SOME OF THESE WERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT I DIDN'T CROSS 'EM OUT. UH, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 3 57 FOR 8 31 LAMAR STREET, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH FOUR 15 FOR EIGHT 13 BURLESON STREET, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 0 9 FOR EIGHT 18 NORTH OLIVE STREET, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 3 56 FOR 9 4 9 14 AND NINE 18 NORTH PINE STREETS. AND THE INDEX SUPPORTS THIS PROJECT AS PRESENTED AND WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO ENGAGE WITH THE DH NA'S AND DECK COMMITTEE IN THE DESIGN PROCESS AND THE RECEPTIVENESS TO DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FROM O H P AND THE D R C THEY MET WITH AS IT RELATES TO THEIR ORIGINAL ITERATION OF THE PROJECT. AND THEN CASES, UH, WITH PARTIAL SUPPORT CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 400 FOR NINE 30 HAYES. THE INDEX CONCURS WITH THE O H P STIPULATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 360 2 FOR 8 31 BURLESON. THE END DECK OCCURS WITH CONCURS WITH O H P RECOMMENDATIONS AND STIPULATIONS AS WELL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. UM, SO, UH, ITEM NUMBER B 21, A CASE 20 19 4 22. IT'S 4 21 LOTUS, UM, HAS BEEN POSTPONED AND WILL BE HEARD AT A FUTURE HEARING [00:20:01] AND WILL NOT BE, UH, ACTED UPON TODAY. AND SO WE'LL MOVE ON [B22 19-5703 Address/Description: 518 NEVADA HDRC Case No.: 2019-423 Applicant: Office of Historic Preservation Request: Finding of Historic Significance City Council Dist.: 2] TO B 22 AGENDA. ITEM B 22 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 23. UM, FIVE 18 NEVADA, THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS REQUESTING A FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT FIVE 18 NEVADA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AND THAT THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION SHOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF FIVE 18 NEVADA TO THE ZONING COMMISSION AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH F. AND JUST A QUICK NOTE, THERE WAS AN ERROR I MADE IN THE CASE UNDER FINDING A, UM, THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED BY OWNER JENNY HERNANDEZ AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE ALAMO DOME GARDENS NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT LAVACCA. UM, SO O H P STAFF IS THE APPLICANT FOR THIS REQUEST. AND SO AT THIS TIME, UM, WE DO HAVE A CITIZEN TO BE HEARD THAT I WILL CALL UPON. UM, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A RESPONSE, UM, FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER. UM, SO VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, MY NAME IS VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, 91 18 FAIRLAND AND I'M SPEAKING FOR THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. OUR PRESIDENT PATTY ZZ, THE SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS WITH THE FINDING OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION THAT THE HOME AT FIVE 18 NEVADA MEETS THREE OF THE CRITERIA REQUIRED IN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR DESIGNATION AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK. FIRST, IT SERVED AS THE HOME OF REVEREND JOHN T AND NELLY JACOBS, LEADERS OF THE EAST END METHODIST CHURCH. THE NEARBY CHURCH WAS RENAMED JACOBS CHAPEL TO HONOR THIS INFLUENTIAL CLERGYMAN. THIS HOUSE IS A RARE REVIVING LANDMARK OF AMERICAN HISTORY IN AN AREA DECIMATED BY URBAN RENEWAL AND HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION. SECOND, THE HOUSE IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF A FOLK VICTORIAN HOME BUILT IN 1905. IT RETAINS ITS ORIGINAL ORIENTATION MATERIALS AND MASSING WITH TWO EASILY REVERSIBLE ADDITIONS TO THE REAR. THIRDLY, THE BUILDING ANCHORS A POTENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICT IN A REGION NOT CURRENTLY PROTECTED BY DESIGNATION. RECOGNITION OF THIS IMPORTANT COMMUNITY LANDMARK CAN INSPIRE FUTURE PRESERVATION EFFORTS IN THE COMMUNITY. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, SAN NEW CONSERVATION SOCIETY FOR PRESIDENT PETTY SCIENCE. THANK YOU. AND WE DO HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER AVAILABLE. JENNY HERNANDEZ. UH, MY NAME IS JENNY HERNANDEZ. I LIVE AT 5 22 NEVADA RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO FIVE 18. UM, NOT ONLY AM I A RESIDENT THERE, BUT I'M ALSO A CUSTOM HOME BUILDER IN THE AREA AND HAVE BEEN SINCE 2009. FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS I'VE BEEN RESTORING HOMES IN DIGNITY HILL, KNOB HILL AND DENVER HEIGHTS. UM, I BELIEVE IN THE RESTORATION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS. I HAVE ALSO BUILT OVER 20 NEW CONSTRUCTION HOMES ON THE EAST SIDE, INCLUDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, ALWAYS KEEPING THE CHARACTERISTICS AND THE, UM, CHARM OF EXISTING HOMES IN THE AREA SO THAT THEY MATCH AND THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR MANY YEARS. UM, I'M THE SOLE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT NINE 18 NEVADA, UH, FIVE 18 NEVADA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND I'M NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION. I PURCHASED THE HOME FIVE YEARS AGO, UH, KNOWING THAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD FLIPPED THE HOUSE AND DIDN'T KEEP MANY OF THE ORIGINAL FINISHES. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT WAS BUILT AS A VICTORIAN STYLE HOME, BUT SO MUCH OF THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER HAS BEEN LOST. UH, THE HOUSE HAS VINYL WINDOWS. UM, THE, UH, ADDITION TO THE REAR, REAR SIDE, IT'S COVERED WITH PLYWOOD. SIDING, HAS VERY LOW CEILINGS. NOTHING IS UP TO CODE. THE HOUSE NEEDS NEW ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, AN HVAC SYSTEM, INSULATION AND NEW FRAMING BECAUSE THE EXISTING STUDS ARE NON SALVAGEABLE AS DEEMED BY A LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. AND I HAVE THAT, UM, LETTER TODAY. UM, IT WAS ALSO PREVIOUSLY SUGGESTED BY STAFF THAT THE HOUSE BE TAKEN BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WOULD LEAVE, WHICH WOULD LEAVE ABOUT 600 SQUARE FEET OF LIVING SPACE. THE HOUSE WOULD BE LEFT WITHOUT A UTILITY ROOM FOR A WASHER, DRYER AND WATER HEATER AND NO PLACE FOR EVEN A SMALL TABLE FOR A FAMILY TO SIT AND EAT THE HOUSE IN ITS CURRENT CONDITION CANNOT BE LEASED OUT FOR EVEN ENOUGH RENT TO COVER THE TAXES OF THIS STRUCTURE. I TRIED TO SELL THE HOUSE LAST YEAR. I HAVE THE M L M L SS LISTING WITH HOPES OF SELLING IT, BUT I COULDN'T, UM, TRIED TO RESTORE IT, BROUGHT MY, UM, AN ARCHITECT AND ENGINEER AND THAT'S WHEN IT WAS DEEMED NON-RESTORABLE. I PLANNED TO SALVAGE EVERY HISTORIC MATERIAL [00:25:01] EXISTING IN THE HOME. THE LIVING ROOM IS THE ONLY ROOM WITH REAL WOOD FLOORS. UM, AND THOSE WILL BE CAREFULLY REMOVED AND REPURPOSED INTO THE NEW BUILDING. UH, WILL REPURPOSE ANY ORIGINAL SIDING THAT STILL REMAINS AND INCORPORATED INTO THE NEW STRUCTURE. UM, I FEEL LIKE I HAVE EXERCISED ALL OF MY OPTIONS WITH THIS HOME PRIOR TO REQUESTING DEMOLITION. AND I FEEL LIKE THIS IS MY LAST FEASIBLE OPTION. I'M HERE TODAY, NOT BECAUSE I WANT TO ERASE OR DESTROY THE HISTORIC SPIRIT OF THE HOME, BUT BECAUSE I VERY MUCH WANT TO PRESERVE IT. I BELIEVE THAT I CAN ONLY DO THIS BY PRESERVING ELEMENTS OF THE HOME AND INTEGRATING THEM INTO A NEW BEAUTIFUL STRUCTURE THAT CAN BE ENJOYED FOR MANY GENERATIONS TO COME. IF THERE WERE ANY POSSIBLE WAY TO RESTORE WHAT HAD BEEN LOST, I WOULD BE HONORED TO TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THE LOSS WAS COMPLETED BEFORE I EVER OWNED THIS HOME. I'VE WORKED WITH HISTORIC STAFF MANY TIMES ON MANY DIFFERENT PROJECTS AND I'VE ALWAYS BEEN ON BOARD 100% OF THE TIME. UM, BUT I'M THE ONLY OWNER OF 5 1 8 NEVADA, AND I'M NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE HISTORIC RESERVA, UH, RESERVATION OR DESIGNATION. AND I'M ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT TODAY. UM, I'VE ALSO BROUGHT THE DEEDS HISTORIC STAFF, UM, STATES THAT IT WAS BUILT FOR JT UM, JACOBS IN 1905, BUT THE DEEDED THAT I HAVE GOES BACK TO THAT IT WAS BUILT FOR HIM IN 1905. AND THE DEEDED THAT I HAVE GOES BACK TO 1904 AND IT SHOWS THAT IT WAS SOLD BY A SINGLE FEMALE AND SOLD TO NL PATRICK, AND THEN HE OWNED IT UNTIL 1924 AND SOLD IT TO ANITA RANDALL. AND SO I JUST, YOU KNOW, DON'T HAVE ANY PROOF OF, OR HAVEN'T SEEN ANY PROOF THAT IT WAS BUILT FOR THE REVEREND AND I'VE TRIED TO SELL IT AND I'VE TRIED TO RESTORE IT AND IT'S JUST SITTING AS A VACANT HOME AND I WOULD LOVE TO BUILD SOMETHING NEW. THANK YOU. I HAVE CLARIFIED THE, UM, THE FINDING, UH, FOR THE, UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE, THIRD CRITERIA REGARDING THE ELIGIBLE HISTORIC DISTRICT REGARDING THE REVEREND IF IT WAS BUILT IN 1904 OR 1905. I SEE. SO STAFF RESEARCHED THE PROPERTY, UM, IN TRACED IT BACK TO A CITY DIRECTORY LISTING IN 1905 FOR THE REVEREND JACOBS AND HE AND HIS WIFE LIVE THERE. UM, SHE WAS LISTED IN THE 1909 CITY DIRECTORY AT THIS ADDRESS AND I PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION TO THE APPLICANT AS WELL. YES. SO HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHO BUILT IT, WHO OWNED IT, IT'S HIM LIVING THERE. CORRECT. UM, EVEN THIS IS, UM, WE'RE NOT TODAY KNOW, DECIDING IF IT CAN BE DEMOLISHED OR NOT. WE'RE DECIDING HERE IF IT'S, UH, HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. IF, UM, AND IF STAFF CAN CORRECT ME, IF WE DO, UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, NAMING THIS HISTORIC LANDMARK, SHE WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE CREATE SOME ADDITIONS ON THE LOT OR MAYBE WE CAN LOOK AT, UH, THE, UM, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND IF THAT'S IN REALLY BAD SHAPE, BUT WHAT CAN BE DONE, CORRECT. CORRECT. YEAH. UM, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT WHEN ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS CAME OUT AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE ROOM IN THE BACK AND JUST REALLY NOT ENOUGH ROOM, UM, GIVEN THE SETBACK THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CITY. SO THERE'S REALLY NO ROOM FOR ANY MORE ADDITION TO BE MADE. YEAH, I CAN COMMENT ON THAT. I WAS THAT COMMISSIONER THAT, UH, ATTENDED THE SITE VISIT, UM, ALONG WITH STAFF AND, UM, THE PROPERTY, AS YOU PROBABLY HAVE SEEN IN YOUR, UH, PACKAGE, THERE IS A, A SMALL ADDITION ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. IT'S, UH, NOT HISTORIC. AND, UM, AND, AND MY SUGGESTION AT THE TIME OUT OF THE SIZE THAT THERE MIGHT BE THE POTENTIAL TO REMOVE THAT ADDITION AND ACTUALLY, UM, ADD TO THE PROPERTY, UH, IN SOME WAY, KIND OF A CAMEL CA CAMELBACK TYPE OF ADDITION TO IT WHERE YOU RETAIN THE SCALE AT THE, FROM THE STREET LEVEL, BUT THEN GO UP AND MASSING IN THE BACK. UM, BUT THERE ISN'T A LOT OF DEPTH ON THE SITE, SO THERE'S NOT THE ABILITY TO DO A SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION BEHIND THE, THE STRUCTURE. UM, IT IS CONCERNING THAT THE, THE ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS ARE MISSING AND, UH, WHILE THE INTERIOR IS NOT OUR PURVIEW, THERE'S THERE'S NOT A LOT IN THE INTERIOR THAT'S IN INTACT. THE, THE STRUCTURE ITSELF ON THE EXTERIOR THOUGH IS SOUND AND, AND, UH, IT, IT COULD, UH, IT APPEARS SOUND AND, UH, IT COULD, UH, LEND ITSELF TO SOME KIND OF REHABILITATION OR, OR INCORPORATION IN A LARGER ADDITION. COULD YOU DESCRIBE, YOU HAD, UM, AN ENGINEERING REPORT ON THE CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE [00:30:01] BETTER. COULD UH, STAFF SUMMARIZE THE CONTENT OF THIS LETTER PLEASE? I BELIEVE THE SECTION THAT THE APPLICANT IS REFERRING TO, IT SAYS, UH, WE HAVE FOUND IT TO BE STRUCTURALLY UNSATISFACTORY AND NET NOT ECONOMICALLY SALVAGEABLE. ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. IT WOULD A STRUCTURE BE CONSIDERED HISTORIC IF THE, IF REVEREND JT JUST LIVED THERE AND DIDN'T OWN IT? IT WOULD, SO THIS LETTER ONLY STATES THAT IT'S STRUCTURALLY UNSATISFACTORY. UM, YEAH, BUT SOMETIMES WHAT WE WOULD LOOK FOR IS MORE D 'CAUSE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT SOMETHING ELSE THAT THE STUDS ARE ROTTED. YEAH, THAT'S NOT IN THE LETTER, BUT, AND IF, UM, IF WE DO THIS, UH, HISTORIC LAND, UM, THE APPLICANT WOULD ALSO BE ABLE TO CLAIM ECONOMIC HARDSHIP COUNTING ONE YEAR BACK, CORRECT? I MEAN, WITH THE LISTING THAT SHE HAD LAST YEAR, OR WOULD IT START NOW TWO YEARS FROM NOW? CORY, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S A TIMELINE AFFILIATED WITH ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. UM, SO REALLY LIKE THE, IF IT WERE CURRENTLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC LANDMARK, THEN THE HT R C COULD CONSIDER ECONOMIC HARDSHIP IN REVIEWING A DEMOLITION REQUEST. THIS IS A LITTLE PREEMPTIVE BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN DESIGNATED YET, BUT OF COURSE THE OWNER IS ABLE TO PRESENT THIS INFORMATION FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COMMISSION. UM, REALLY WHAT'S ON THE TABLE TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMISSION CONCURS THAT THE PROPERTY MEETS THREE OF THE 16 CRITERIA FOR ELIGIBILITY. COULD I ASK STAFF TO, UH, PULL UP GOOGLE, UH, MAPS ON THIS ONE AND GIVE US A STRAIGHT VIEW BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S AN IMPORTANT CONTEXT, UH, TO CONSIDER FOR THIS PROPERTY. UM, PARTICULARLY THE PROPERTIES TO THE EAST OF IT, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SMALL STRUCTURES, UH, SHOTGUN STRUCTURES AND THAT SORT OF THING THAT, UH, THIS, THIS, UH, PROPERTY IS A PART OF A, AN ENSEMBLE OF BUILDINGS, UH, THAT MAKE UP A, A PRETTY NICE LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE IS THEN TO THE WEST, THE, THE NEW STRUCTURE THAT THE OWNER HAS HAS, UH, CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTY. AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT THIS PROPERTY HASN'T BEEN SUBDIVIDED. IT'S, IT'S ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY WITH TWO, TWO, UH, HOUSES ON IT ACROSS THE STREET, SIMILAR, UM, STRUCTURES. SO THE ANSWER TO THAT IS, UM, DOWN THE STREET THERE ARE STRUCTURES, THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET YOU CAN SEE THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF A DETERIORATION IN CHEWING AWAY AT THE EDGES OF, OF THIS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD. SO STAFF IS SAYING THAT IT WAS BUILT FOR REVEREND JT AND I JUST WANNA, CAN WE, IS THERE A WAY TO CONFIRM THAT? UM, PROVE THAT? 'CAUSE I FEEL LIKE THAT WAS WHAT, THAT WAS KIND OF THEIR STANCE IS THIS HOME WAS BUILT FOR THIS PERSON AND THAT'S WHY WE WOULD LIKE TO DESIGNATE IT HISTORIC. UM, SO LIKE JESS MENTIONED, UM, THAT FINDING IS BASED ON CITY DIRECTORIES, WHICH ARE GENERALLY CONSIDERED A PRIMARY RESOURCE FOR THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION. UM, OBVIOUSLY IT COULD BE REFUTED, UM, BY ANOTHER, UH, SOURCE OF INFORMATION, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY REASON TO THINK THAT THE CITY DIRECTORY WAS INCORRECT. THE DEEDED DOESN'T REALLY HOLD VALUE. THE DEED WILL IN INDICATE WHO OWNERSHIP AND POTENTIALLY LIKE THE LIEN HOLDER WERE, BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY, UH, REFUTE WHAT THE CITY DIRECTORY SAYS. WHO THE CITY DIRECTORY SAYS LIVED THERE. CRITERIA THAT, UM, O H P IS [00:35:01] REFERENCING, UM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IT'S THAT THE STRUCTURE IS ASSOCIATED WITH A SIGNIFICANT PERSON, NOT NECESSARILY THAT THE STRUCTURE IS OWNED OR BUILT BY THAT, UH, INDIVIDUAL. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, MM-HMM. , UM, BASED ON THE, ON THE REPORT FROM MR. CARPENTER AND ALSO LOOKING AT THE VISUAL OF THE STREET, I DO THINK THAT, UM, AND THE THREE CRITERIA, UM, I WOULD MOVE MOTION TO APPROVE. THAT WAS A MOTION TO APPROVE. OKAY, THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. I HAVE A SECOND. SECOND MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM B [B23 19-5865 Address/Description: 9338 ESPADA RD HDRC Case No.: 2019-351 Historic District Name: Mission RIO District: RIO-6 Applicant: Veronica Santellan Request: Construction of a rear addition City Council Dist.: 3] 23 H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 19 3 51, 93 38 IS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH F STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICANT REDUCE THE PROPOSED FOOTPRINT, MASSING AND HEIGHT OF THE ADDITION, AS WELL AS INCORPORATE MATERIALS THAT ARE COMPLEMENTARY OF THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT. UM, I WILL NOTE THIS CASE WAS REVIEWED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THAT THE APPLICANT HAS UPDATED, UH, SOME APPLICATION DOCUMENTS TO ADDRESS THE DISCUSSION AT THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. HI, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. MY NAME IS VERONICA SANON AND I'M THE HOMEOWNER AT 9 3 3 8 ESP FATHER ROAD. UM, JUST TO RECAP A LITTLE BIT FROM LAST MONTH'S MEETING, UM, THE PROPERTY'S BEEN IN MY FAMILY FOR 47 YEARS, UM, IN DECEM ON DECEMBER 4TH, 2006, I HAD MET AND RECEIVED THE APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO RELOCATE A HOME ONTO THE PROPERTY. UM, IT HAD A SMALL TRAVEL TRAILER AND IT STILL HAS THE HORSE STALLS WAY AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, BUT THERE WASN'T A, UH, A, A HOME STRUCTURE. SO WE MOVED THE, THE HOME ONTO THE PROPERTY IN 2006. I'M SORRY, WE GOT THE RECEIPT, UH, APPROVAL IN 2006. WE MOVED IN 2007. UM, THE HOME CURRENTLY IS, UH, 624 SQUARE FEET. UH, WE'RE REQUESTING TO ADD ADDITION TO OUR HOME, UH, GROSS AREA SQUARE FEET OF 996 TO THE EXISTING 624 SQUARE FEET. AND I LIKE, AS MR. HALL HAD INDICATED, I'VE ALSO ATTACHED, UM, MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS BASED ON THE D R C MEETING THAT WE HAD LAST TUESDAY, UM, IN AGREEMENT TO CHANGING ALL THE FRONTAGE WINDOWS TO ALUMINUM, ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND THE METAL ROOF TO INCLUDE FLAT RIDGE CAP. AND ALSO IF YOU CAN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, UM, THAT WE'RE DOING THE WORK OURSELVES AS HOMEOWNERS. SO WE ARE DOING, WE ARE, WE WILL BE ASKING FOR A FUTURE REQUEST TO ADD A WRAPAROUND PORCH TO THE HOME, UM, AS IT SHOWS UP THERE ON THE SCREEN. SO THIS IS JUST THE FIRST STEP TO ADD TO OUR, OUR HOME. UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? A QUESTION FOR STAFF. ARE WE TO CONSIDER THE WRAPAROUND PORCH AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION THEN THE, THE WRAPAROUND PORCH IS, IF, IF I'M CORRECT, WAS, UH, INCLUDED TO GIVE A BETTER, UM, IDEA AND UNDERSTANDING TO THE COMMISSION OF WHY THE PROPOSED ADDITION WAS POSITIONED IN THE MANNER THAT IT WAS, UM, TO GIVE KIND OF AN OVERALL CONTEXT OF THE FUTURE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY. UM, THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION, UM, IS TO, UH, REVIEW THE ADDITION ITSELF. UM, AND THEN IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, THE APPLICANT AT A SUBSEQUENT DATE WILL SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR THE WRAPAROUND PORCH AS THAT WORK IS PLANNED TO BE, BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FUTURE. CORRECT. I CAN GIVE A REPORT FROM THE D R C. UH, THIS, THIS [00:40:01] WAS, UH, REFERRED TO THE D R C UH, ON UPON OUR LAST MEETING AND THERE WAS SOME CO CONCERN ABOUT THE POSITION OF THE MASSING IN THE SENSE THAT IT, IT SHIFTED, UH, TOWARD THE STREET. THE REASON WHY IT SHIFTED TOWARD THE STREET WAS BECAUSE OF THE PROPOSED FUTURE EDITION OF THE PORCH. CORRECT. WHICH MADE SENSE. SO, UH, ONCE THE D R C KIND OF UNDERSTOOD WHY THE ADDITION WAS GOING WHERE IT WAS AND THAT, UM, FUTURE PHASES MAKE THAT RELATIONSHIP MAKE MORE SENSE, THEN WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, THE SIDING AND THAT THE SIDING MATCH, UH, THE SIDING ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. CORRECT. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. AND, UH, WE TALKED ABOUT THE, UH, THE RIDGE, THE LOW PROFILE RIDGE CAP ON THE ROOF AND UM, KIND OF FOUND SOME MIDDLE GROUND ON THE WINDOWS. OBVIOUSLY THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, UH, HAS VINYL WINDOWS. CORRECT. WHICH DON'T, WHICH DON'T COMPLY. AND WE KIND OF HAD SOME ISSUES OF COMPATIBILITY WHAT WE DO THERE. SO THE APPLICANT OFFERED TO REPLACE ALL THE STREET FACING WINDOWS WITH AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD THAT MEETS OUR SPECIFICATION. UM, I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TALK ABOUT THE HEIGHT AND THE MASS. UH, WE DID AND I DON'T THINK WE HAD ANY CONCERN WITH IT. UM, I THINK THE LAST TIME THIS CAME TO THE COMMISSION, UM, WE KIND OF UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WOULD BE A, UH, A BIT OF LATITUDE GIVEN, UH, THE LOCATION OF THIS AND, UH, THE RELOCATION OF THE HOUSE TO THIS SITE AND THAT THAT WASN'T, UH, BROUGHT UP AS AN ISSUE DURING THE D R C. PERHAPS STAFF COULD GIVE A LITTLE MORE CLARIFICATION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. UM, AS THE APPLICANT NOTED, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WAS RELOCATED TO THE PROPERTY, I BELIEVE IN 2007, 2008. UM, THE STRUCTURE ITSELF WAS CONSTRUCTED CIRCUIT 19 80, 19 85. UM, SO THE MATERIALS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON SITE ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE GUIDELINES WOULD ENTAIL. UH, FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, UM, STAFF ISN'T GONNA GIVE A RECOMMENDATION TO, UM, FURTHER, UM, PUSH, UH, A NON-CONTRIBUTING MATERIAL. HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION HAS THAT ABILITY AND THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED TO, UM, HAVE A WHOLESOME DESIGN ON THE PROPERTY THAT THEY HAVE PROPOSED TO MATCH THE MATERIALS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE AND UPGRADE MATERIALS AS THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AS WE SEE WITH THE WINDOWS. WELL, BASED UPON THE, UM, THE DISCUSSION TODAY AND THE SUBMISSION OF THE MATERIALS, UH, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE STREET FACING WINDOWS, UM, BE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS, THAT THE SIDING OF THE ADDITION MATCH THE EXISTING SIDING OF THE, UH, THE STRUCTURE AND, UH, THAT A FLAT, UH, METAL TRADITIONAL, UH, RIDGE CAP BE UTILIZED ON THE ROOF. SECOND, CAN I JUST ADD SOMETHING? CAN ALL WINDOWS JUST COMPLY WITH OUR WINDOWS SPECIFICATIONS OR IS THAT, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW IF, SO THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED THAT THE EXISTING WINDOWS, UM, ARE NOT THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. THAT THOSE, UM, THEY HAVEN'T PROPOSED TO MODIFY THOSE. UM, OUTSIDE OF THAT, UM, OTHER THAN THE STREET FACING, I'M NOT CERTAIN THAT THEY'RE, OR NO, NO, I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE NEW ON THE ADDITION. NO, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY WINDOWS THAT ACTUALLY WOULD BE. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY WINDOWS THERE WOULD BE WITHOUT THOSE THAT ARE STREET FACING? THERE'LL BE I THINK MAYBE THREE ADDITIONAL WINDOWS THAT WOULD BE ON THE REAR. THERE WOULD BE THREE UH, WINDOWS THAT WOULD BE, UM, I BELIEVE ON THE SOUTH SIDE. ON THE SOUTH SIDE FOR CLARIFICATION. ALL THE WINDOWS IN THE ADDITION WOULD BE THE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD. WE HAD AGREED THAT ALL THE WINDOWS FACING THE FACING STREET, MS. FATHER, MS. FATHER ROAD, WOULD BE ALUMINUM CLAD. I CANNOT, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF INSIGHT HERE. UH, THE, THE WINDOWS IN THE, THE STRUCTURE THAT SITS ON THE SITE NOW ARE NEW AND THE IDEA WAS THAT THOSE WOULD BE PULLED AND REPLACED ON THE STREET SIDE. ON THE STREET SIDE. RIGHT. AND THOSE THAT ARE PULLED AND REPLACED WOULD BE REUSED. YES. IN THE ADDITION, THE ADDITION AT A REAR FACING LOT RATHER THAN BE, UH, HAVE TO PURCHASE NEW ONES DEMOLISHED OR, OR THROWN AWAY. AND WHAT ABOUT ALL NEW OTHER WINDOWS? ALL THE ADDITIONAL WINDOWS, THERE'LL BE THREE ADDITIONAL WINDOWS. SO IF WE, WHEN WE REMOVE THE TWO WINDOWS THAT ARE EXISTING, WE'LL BE ABLE TO USE THOSE AND THEN PURCHASE A THIRD ONE. SO WOULD YOU LIKE US TO THE THIRD ONE THAT WE PURCHASED TO BE ALUMINUM CLAD, THE APPLICANT ESSENTIALLY WAS GOING TO RECYCLE TWO WINDOWS THAT WOULD BE DISPLACED DUE TO THE [00:45:01] ADDITION. UM, THOSE TWO WINDOWS ARE GONNA BE CYCLED TO THE FAR RIGHT SIDE OR THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ADDITION. AND THEN THE APPLICANT AT THAT POINT WOULD NEED TO BUY ONE MORE WINDOW FOR THAT FACADE. UM, SO THE APPLICANT'S NOW PROPOSING THAT, BUT YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THE ADDITION ONLY HAS THREE WINDOWS. THE ADDITION HAS SIX TOTAL. THREE OF WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY AGREED TO HAVE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD. UM, SO THAT THE STREET BASE WOULD HAVE ALL ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS. THE APPLICANTS THEN SAID THE EXISTING, INSTEAD OF BUYING NEW WINDOWS FOR THE ADDITION, THE EXISTING WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE HOUSE, THAT THE ADDI, THE PORTION OF THE HOUSE THAT THE ADDITION WILL BE ATTACHED TO WILL BE RECYCLED AND THEN MOVED TO, TO THE SOUTH WALL, WHICH IS ON THE FAR RIGHT SIDE OF THE SCREEN. UM, THE APPLICANT'S SAYING THAT THOSE WINDOWS, THEY WERE GOING TO REUSE EXISTING WINDOWS RATHER THAN BUY NEW WINDOWS. SO INSTEAD OF THE APPLICANT BUYING SIX NEW WINDOWS, THE APPLICANT IS ONLY GONNA BUY THREE NEW WINDOWS. UM, AND THE APPLICANT'S NOW SAYING THAT SHE COULD POTENTIALLY, UM, ONE OF THE WINDOWS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED, SHE COULD POTENTIALLY BUY A FOURTH ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW FOR THAT WINDOW. IS THIS A TWO STORY ADDITION? IT HAS ATTIC SPACE, BUT WHAT WE DID WAS WE MATCHED THE PITCH OF OTHER HOMES ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PARTICULARLY THE ONE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO US. THE EXISTING PITCH OF OUR HOME HAS A BOW IN IT, THE, THE ROOF. SO THE HOME STRUCTURE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO OURS HAS A HIGHER PITCH. SO WE, WE KEPT THAT IN MIND WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE. JUST ASKING BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE ANY STAIRS IN YOUR FLOOR PLAN. NO, THERE'S NO STAIRS. IT UM, I'M SORRY, THIS ONE'S THAT PULL DOWN STAIRS. IT SHOULD HAVE HAVE, IT SHOULD HAVE A PULL DOWN ON THE REAR PART OF THE ADDITION. SORRY IT DOESN'T HAVE IT ON HERE. THE UH, OVERALL ROOF HEIGHT AND PITCH THAT THE APPLICANT'S REFERRING TO. UM, THIS IS A HISTORIC HOUSE THAT'S TO THE NORTH, UM, OF THIS PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT HAS UH, UH, MODELED THEIR ROOF FORM, UM, PITCH AND HEIGHT, UM, TO BE A LITTLE COMPLIMENTARY OF THE HISTORIC FORM THAT'S FOUND ADJACENT TO THE NORTH CHAIRMAN. I HAVE A MOTION JUST WE HAVE A MOTION AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE A SECOND FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AGENDA [B24 19-5889 Address/Description: 914 N PINE ST, 918 N PINE HDRC Case No.: 2019-356 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: David Ericsson/Pine 14 & Pine 18 LLC Request: Construction of a 1-story, residential structure at 918 N Pine and a 1-story, rear accessory structure at 914 N Pine City Council Dist.: 2] ITEM NUMBER B 24 H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 19 3 56 9 14 AND NINE 18 NORTH PINE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE CONSTRUCT, A ONE STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO FEATURE OCCUPIED ATTIC SPACE AT NINE 18 NORTH PINE TO FRONT NORTH PINE AND TWO, TO CONSTRUCT A ONE STORY REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE LOT AT NINE 14 NORTH PINE. IN REGARDS TO ITEM NUMBER ONE, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AT NINE 18 NORTH PINE. BASED ON FINDINGS ONE A THROUGH ONE I STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO THE APPLICANT RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED TRADITIONAL ENTRANCES NOTED IN FINDING ONE A TO INCLUDE APPROPRIATE FRONT DOOR DESIGN AND MASSING. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATE TRADITIONAL ROOF ELEMENTS SUCH AS EAVES INTO THE PROPOSED SIDE. GABLED ROOF IS NOTED IN FINDING ONE A ONE E AS WELL AS INSTALL A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF TO FEATURE PANELS THAT ARE 18 TO 21 INCHES WIDE. SEAMS THAT ARE ONE TO TWO INCHES IN HEIGHT OF C CRI RIDGE SEAM AND A STANDARD GLOOM FINISH. UH, LOW RIDGE CAP MAY BE USED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. HOWEVER, THE RIDGE CAP MAY BE SUBMIT MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR STAFF'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT UTILIZE A FOUNDATION HEIGHT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES THROUGHOUT. AS NOTED IN FINDING ONE D FOUR THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED MATERIALS THAT ARE, THAT ARE APPLIED IN A TRADITIONAL MANNER IS NOTED IN FINDING ONE G. STIPULATION FIVE ARE STAFF'S WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS. SIX. THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS VARIOUS ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS THAT ARE NEITHER CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES NOR IN KEEPING WITH THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. IS NOTED IN FINDING ONE I IN REGARDS TO ITEM TWO, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO, THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT NINE 14 NORTH PINE BASED ON FINDINGS TWO A THROUGH TWO F. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING PRIOR TO THE APPLICATION RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT [00:50:01] CONSIDER AN OVERALL REDUCTION IN FOOTPRINT TO COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES IS NOTED IN FINDING TWO C TWO THAT THE APPLICANT APPLICANT INCORPORATE TRADITIONAL MATERIALS THAT ARE USED HISTORICALLY FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION THROUGHOUT THE DIGNITY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT IS NOTED IN FINDING TWO D AND TWO F STIPULATION THREE OR STAFFS WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS STIPULATION FOUR STAFF SPECIFICATIONS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY READ. UH, BELOW THERE ARE TWO CASE COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO A FOUNDATION INSPECTION PRIOR TO THE POURING OF A FOUNDATION AND A ROOFING INSPECTION PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF ROOFING MATERIALS. I WILL NOTE THAT THIS APPLICATION, THE 60 DAY REVIEW PERIOD, ENDS ON AUGUST THE 21ST. SO ACTION MUST BE TAKEN TODAY. WE'LL ALSO NOTE THIS CASE IS REVIEWED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS THAT ARE IN YOUR PACKETS THAT ADDRESS, UM, OR THAT SPEAK TO UM, THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S COMMENTS. YOU CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT UP. HELLO, I'M DAVID ERICKSON. I'M THE OWNER OF NINE 14 AND NINE 18 PINE. UM, OH COOL. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS WILL BE REVIEWING AND I NEED TO BRING UP NOW IS THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BEHIND THE BUILDING. THE ORIGINAL, UM, APPLICATION PACKAGE I PUT TOGETHER HAD A LARGER LONG LINEAR STRUCTURE THAT, UM, WAS THERE A POINTER? WHERE'S THE POINTER? UM, OH, OKAY. WELL THAT'S FINE. . UM, THE ORIGINAL APP, UM, I GUESS THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION HAD TWO STRUCTURES. ONE FILLING THE TOOTH THAT PARKING LOT IN THE STREET ELEVATION, I MEAN THE STREET. YEP. AND THEN I HAD ANOTHER ONE WHERE ALL THOSE CARS ARE PARKED ALONG. IT WAS A 78 FOOT LONG GABLE THAT RAN THE LENGTH OF THAT EXISTING PAD. UM, THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NOT APPROVING THE PROJECT IN INVOLVED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH TWO LARGE OF A FOOTPRINT ON THAT, UM, REAR STRUCTURE. AND THEN THE FRONT BUILDING NEEDED MORE TRADITIONAL MATERIALS, WHICH I THINK WENT ALL THE WAY AROUND. SO I'VE TABLED THE, UM, APPLICATION SO THAT I COULD MEET WITH THE D R C, UM, HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THE COMMENTS AND TRY TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WAS MORE, MORE SYM UH, SYMPATHETIC TO THE, THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES. SO, UM, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S STREET ELEVATION. SO THE NEW STRUCTURE THAT I'M PUTTING ON THE STREET, I TRIED TO INCORPORATE MORE TRADITIONAL FRONT DOORS THAT WERE NOTED IN ONE OF THE FINDINGS. UM, ONE ONE AND IF I CAN GET TO THE ELEVATION AND JUST TO BRING YOU UP TO SPEED THAT THE APP, THE STRUCTURES ARE TRYING TO PICK UP ON THIS FOLK VICTORIAN SLASH EARLY TEXAS VERNACULAR PORCH CUTOUT LANGUAGE. AND THAT'S KIND OF LIKE THE GESTURE THAT YOU'LL SEE SHOW UP THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT. AND THEN SPEAKING OF THESE CONTEXTS OF THESE EARLY TEXAS HOUSES, HOW THEY WOULD HAVE TWO FRONT DOORS AND WINDOWS FLANKING THESE DOORS. AND THAT WAS KIND OF THE MOTIF THAT I TRIED TO BRING TO, TO THIS ELEVATION IN A LITTLE BIT MORE OBVIOUS, UH, MANNER IN THIS SUBMISSION. SO THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT IS I HAVE THESE INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS, UM, THAT REALLY REFERENCED THE PREVIOUS ITERATION. BUT UM, SO LOOKING AT THE STRUCTURES, I ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK UP IN THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER, I HAVE, I USED TO HAVE TWO STRUCTURES, ONE LARGE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO THE RIGHT AND THEN ONE IN, AND THEN ONE FRONT BUILDING THAT YOU CAN SEE THERE THAT DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH FRONT DOORS. SO IF YOU LOOK DOWN, I ACTUALLY DIVIDED THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE INTO TWO STRUCTURES. SO I'M ASKING FOR, UM, APPROVAL FOR THE TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO, BECAUSE THEY ASKED FOR THE FOOTPRINT TO BE BROKEN UP TO BE 40% OF THE MAIN HOUSE. SO THERE'S A PLAN. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE FRONT EL, IF YOU WANT ME TO SIT ON A PLAN OR IF YOU GUYS GOOD WITH ME KEEP, UM, GOING ON. UM, THE, THE FRONT ELEVATION, I THINK THE CONFUSING PART HERE IS I HAVE THESE LOUVERS THAT WILL SLIDE OVER THOSE WEST FACING WINDOWS, BUT IT IS WINDOW DOOR, DOOR WINDOW, LIKE THE ORIGINAL, UM, PRECEDENT. I SHOWED PREVIOUS ITERATIONS DOWN BELOW. AND I WANTED TO ALSO NOTE THAT I WANT I INCORPORATED HARDY BOARD. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO DO AN EIGHT INCH PANEL INSTEAD OF A FOUR-INCH 'CAUSE I'M TRYING TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT LARGER OF A READING ON THE, ON THE SIDING. BUT I ORIGINALLY HAD CORRUGATED BUT I, I HEARD THE D R C AND O HP'S RECOMMENDATIONS. I ALSO CHANGED THE ROOF FROM A CORRUGATED [00:55:01] METAL ROOF TO A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF. AS RECOMMENDED THOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A FLUSH DETAIL ON THE EDGE AND NOT HAVE EAVES. THIS IS THAT SIDE ELEVATION THAT KIND OF ALSO EXPLAINS WHY I'M NOT ARTICULATING THE, THE PORCH 12 INCHES. THE WHOLE WAY ACROSS THE BUILDING IS I HAVE THIS LEAN TO LANGUAGE ON THE BACK THAT'S SYMPATHETIC WITH MY NEIGHBOR'S LEAN TO AND THAT'S ON GRADE. AND THE TRANSITION TO SIDING, IT MADE MOST SENSE TO TRANSITION AT THE CUTOUT 'CAUSE IT'S PURE VOLUME AND THAT KIND OF STUFF. HERE ARE THOSE ELEVATIONS WHERE YOU CAN SEE WINDOW DOOR. WINDOW DOOR, PREVIOUS ITERATION THAT I IMPROVED. CAN I, CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF STAFF? UM, IN THE D IN THE D R C, WE WERE LOOKING AT THE PROJECT THAT ON YOUR, IN YOUR FILE, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS WRAPPED IN RED. OH YEAH. IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER. OH YEAH. . THIS IS THE PROPOSAL THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT IN THE D R C AND WHAT YOU'RE PRESENTING HERE, UH, WERE KIND OF, IT'S BEEN REFLECTS THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAD IN THE DRC TO SOME EXTENT. SO HAS THE NEW PROPOSAL BEEN REVIEWED OR THE UPDATED, SO THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THIS TO STAFF LAST THURSDAY MORNING. WE POSTED OUR AGENDA THAT AFTERNOON WEDNESDAY NIGHT AT MIDNIGHT. I NO, YOU AT MIDNIGHT. YEAH, NO, SORRY. THE UM, ANYWAYS, UM, SO KNOWING THAT THE APPLICATION WAS SOON TO EXPIRE, STAFF NEEDED TO GET IT BACK ON THE AGENDA. UM, IN REGARDS TO THE SEPARATION OF THE REAR TWO, UM, THAT HASN'T BEEN COMMENTED ON. UM, I WILL NOTE THAT MANY OF THE INSTANCES THAT STAFF HAS POINTED TO IN THE GUIDELINES THAT THIS ISN'T CONSISTENT WITH THE UPDATED DESIGN WHILE IT'S CLOSER TO MEETING THOSE, IT'S NOT, UM, I'LL NOTE THAT IT'S NOT THERE YET. UM, THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT CONSISTENT. UM, HOWEVER, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY, THE UPDATES THAT YOU SEE NOW ARE IN RESPONSE TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S COMMENTS. UM, SO THE UPDATES THAT YOU SEE, THOSE UM, SHOULD HAVE SOME SEMBLANCE OF A RESPONSE TO THE DISCUSSION THAT TOOK PLACE AT THAT MEETING. AND UH, IT'S ALSO IN RESPONSE TO THE ORIGINAL STIPULATION THAT CORRECT. OF THE STAFF PUT FORWARD. ALRIGHT. UM, IF I CAN JUST TRY TO GUIDE THIS CONVERSATION A LITTLE BIT. SURE. CAN WE START WITH THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND THE KIND OF THE UNIQUE CONDITION THAT EXISTS BACK HERE. WILL YOU JUST WALK US THROUGH THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NINE 18 PINE YES. AND NINE 14 PINE? YEAH. SO NINE 14 AND NINE 18 PINE WERE USED TO BE OWNED BY THE SAME PERSON. AND NINE 18 PINE, IF YOU LOOKED THAT BIG WHITED OUT SQUARE USED TO BE ALON A LAUNDROMAT THAT I HAD RENOVATED BACK IN 2012, UM, INTO A HOME. AND THAT, UM, INDUSTRIAL FOR LIKE THE INDUSTRIAL CONTEXT I WAS REFERENCING, UM, HAD THE PARKING LOT IN THE FRONT TO THE SOUTH. UM, WHERE YOU SEE THESE LITTLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES THAT FORM A COURT WITH THAT ORIG, WITH THAT ORIGINAL STRUCTURE THAT USED TO BE ONE LARGE PARKING STRUCTURE, THERE'S ONE VERY LARGE, LIKE 24 FEET WIDE BY 80 FOOT LONG CONCRETE PAD, UM, THAT I'M REMOVING USING AS A PAVER AND THEN REPLACING WITH THESE TWO SMALLER STUDIO, UM, DWELLINGS. SO WHEN WE ARE, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT, WHEN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS STRUCTURED IN A WAY THAT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS BEING CONSIDERED AN ACCESSORY TO NINE 14 PINE YES. AND YOU'VE, YOU'VE MADE SOME MANEUVERS TO BETTER RELATE TO NINE 14 PINE. CORRECT. BUT THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL RELATED ESSENTIALLY TO NINE 18 PINE CORRECT. AS AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WHICH IS HOW THAT AREA OF THAT PARCEL HAD RELATED TO THE BUILDING FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME. CORRECT? CORRECT. SO I WAS TRYING TO MIG TRYING TO BRING THOSE TWO INFLUENCES TOGETHER SO THAT NINE FOUR, THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON NINE 14 PINE RESPONDED IN SCALE TO THE MAIN HOUSE BY BREAKING UP ITS MASSING WHILE STILL HAVING A BUILDING THAT RESPONDS TO NINE 18. 'CAUSE THAT WAS ITS ORIGINAL PUR LIKE USE OR WELL, I, I AGREE GIVEN IT'S MULTIPLE RELATIONSHIPS, PARTICULARLY THE ONE TO THE NORTH, THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME FLEXIBILITY WITH THAT REAR BIT WHEN IT COMES TO LAND COVERAGE OR CHARACTER. UM, WILL YOU WALK US THROUGH THE ELEVATIONS OF WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING THERE? YES. AND SO THE OTHER THING TO NOTE TOO, THESE FOOTPRINTS, NOW THIS STUDIO BUILDING IS 42% THE SCALE OF NINE 14. SO I TRY TO GET IT CLOSER TO 40. AND THE OTHER SMALLER BUILDING THAT'S A WORKSHOP IS AT 32% OF THE SCALE, UM, TO MEET THOSE ACCESSORY BUILDING, UM, GUIDELINES. SO THE ELEVATIONS, WHICH I, [01:00:02] SO THAT STUDIO BUILDING TO THE RIGHT, UM, WAS CORRUGATED METAL WITH A CORRUGATED METAL ROOF AND A PORCH THAT ACTUALLY FACES THE PLAZA WITH, UM, THAT OTHER SMALLER STUDIO BUILDING THAT WOULD BE CLAD IN A TRANSLUCENT COR CORRUGATED. UM, AND THE CORRUGATED METAL, UH, STRUCTURE AND THAT WOULD FACE THE LAUNDROMAT. UM, AND THERE UM, ROOF PITCHES ARE, THE ROOF PITCH OF THE STRUCTURE TO THE RIGHT IS THE SAME AS THE ROOF PITCH OF THE NINE 14 AND THE NEW BUILDING. THIS CHANGES PARTIALLY IN RESPONSE TO PROBABLY MY REACTION OF PUTTING A LONG BUILDING YES. UH, AGAINST YOUR SOUTH NEIGHBOR YARD HAVING 70 YARD EIGHT FEET TO TELL YOUR NEIGHBORS YOU CAN'T LOOK IN. SO I BROKE THAT UP. NOW THERE'S A FRIENDLY NEIGHBOR SPACE RIGHT IN BETWEEN, BUT ALSO IT'S, IT MADE A NICER BUILDING THAT D R C COMMENTS MADE THE PROJECT BETTER. UH, EVEN IF IT'S NOT THERE YET, I HOPE IT'S , UM, THE EXTERIOR THAT WHAT USED TO BE THAT WAS LIKE REALLY LONG, THE EXTERIOR CLADDING, THE UH, ROOF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. WHAT IS THAT? SO THAT WAS CORRUGATED METAL. BUT I, AFTER READING THESE UM, COMMENTS, I THINK IT WOULD BETTER RESPOND TO THE FRONT BUILDING IF I CHANGED THAT TO HARDY WITH THE STAINING CEMENT METAL ROOF. SO THAT WAY EVEN IN IT'S FROM THE STREET, IT WOULD MATCH BETTER WITH THE OTHER BUILDINGS. UM, SO WHEN READING THOSE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'D BE HAPPY TO INCORPORATE THOUGH. I WOULD LIKE TO DO THE, THE FLUSH EVE, UM, AND NOT HAVE ANY OVERHANGS ON THE, ON THE GABLE END SO I COULD GET THAT CLEAN SHAPE. UM, BUT, BUT YEAH, SO IT WOULD BE A SIMILAR, IT WOULD BE THE SAME SIDING AND ARTICULATION AS THE FRONT BUILDING WOULD THEN GO TO THIS. SO I'M GONNA RUN THROUGH THE STIPULATIONS ON ITEM TWO, WHICH JUST STARTING WITH TWO BECAUSE IT JUST SEEMS EASY. YEAH, YEAH. UM, STIPULATION ONE DIRECTED THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER AN OVERALL REDUCTION IN FOOTPRINT. SO WHAT YOU'VE DONE IS YOU'VE BROKEN IT IN A TWO BUILDINGS THAT ARE NOW LIKE MOSTLY CONFORMING. THEY'RE TO TECHNICALLY COMPLY, BUT THERE ARE STILL TWO OF THEM THERE. AND THERE'S A GOOD BIT OF YEAH. COVERAGE, BUT LESS COVERAGE THAN YOU WERE SEEKING ORIGINALLY. UH, HOW MUCH LESS COVERAGE? SO THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE THAT I HAD WAS 1100 SQUARE FOOT OF COVERAGE. NOW I HAVE A 600 AND 670 FEET OF COVERAGE IN THAT STUDIO BUILDING TO THE RIGHT. AND THEN THE SMALLER BUILDINGS, 380 SQUARE FEET. SO THOUGH IT'S ROUGH THOUGH, IT'S STILL AROUND THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE, IT'S BROKEN OUT INTO TWO VOLUMES THAT CAN BOTH MEET THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SCALE. 'CAUSE THERE ARE MULTIPLE BUILDINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE TWO SMALLER BACK HOUSES, BUT THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ONE GIANT ONE, WHICH IS, I I MEAN I THINK THE INTENT OF THE COMMENT IS NOT THAT YOU CAN DO MULTIPLES OF THAT PERCENTAGE . OH, . BUT, UM, UH, GIVEN, GIVEN THE RELATIONSHIP, I MEAN NOT AT, NOT NECESSARILY AT ONE TIME. THERE ARE, YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE ARE MULTIPLE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. UM, I THINK THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, THEIR FOOTPRINT AND THEIR MASSING IS GENERALLY, UH, SECONDARY TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. AND I THINK GIVEN ITS RELATIONSHIP, UH, TO THE PROJECT TO THE NORTH THAT GENERALLY THE FOOTPRINT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS COMMISSION I IS. I AGREE. I AGREE. IT DOESN'T LOOK TOO MUCH. UM, I I DO THINK THAT THAT, UM, I COULD, I COULD AGREE WITH THAT. MOVE ON THE NEXT STIPULATION. WELL, BECAUSE THE LOT ITSELF IS REALLY, REALLY BIG. UM, YEAH. IT IT ALSO HAS BEEN REPLANTED A NUMBER OF TIMES, RIGHT? YEAH, YEAH. UM, ON ITEM TWO AS PERTAINS TO THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE INCORPORATION OF TRADITIONAL MATERIALS. UM, YOU'RE ACQUI ACQUIESCING THAT WE CAN USE HARDY AND OUR STANDARD, UH, LAP SIDING LANGUAGE COULD MAYBE MAKE IT INTO A MOTION. WELL THEY ASKED FOR FOUR INCH, FOUR INCH HARDY HARDY BOARD SIDING WITH THE MITRE CORNER. I LOVE THE MIRED CORNER, BUT I'D LOVE TO DO AN EIGHT INCH SIDING PLANK IF I CAN'T GET AWAY WITH IT ALL, I'LL GIVE IN. BUT CAN I DO EIGHT? I THINK THIS IS BASED ON THE PRIMARY DIRECT IS WHAT'S THE MATERIAL ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE? THE, THE STRUCTURE TO THE RIGHT IS A WOOD HOUSE. THAT'S, IT HAS MORE OF THAT FOUR INCH SIDING. SO , [01:05:02] LET'S CIRCLE BACK AROUND IT THAT WAY. OKAY. LET'S NUMBER THREE, THE, THE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS. UM, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FENESTRATION ON THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THAT BRIEFLY? YES. SO ACTUALLY I, UM, I HAD ALUMINUM CLAD, LIKE ONE BIG PUNCH ON THAT GABLE END TO THE, THE LEFT. A SMALLER ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS MORE, IT'S LIKE A GIANT WALL OF TRANSLUCENT, A TRANSLUCENT GLAZING MATERIAL BECAUSE IT'S LIKE, SO JUST, JUST SO I CAN UNDERSTAND, YOU'RE KIND OF TREATING THAT ALMOST LIKE IT'S AN ENCLOSED CARPORT. YEAH. YOU'RE USING COW WALL OR SOME KIND OF TRANSLUCENT ENCLOSURE. IT'S INDUSTRIAL NATURE, LIKE THE LAUNDROMAT BEHIND VERSUS THIS OTHER BUILDING. THE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW, UM, ARE ON ITS ELEVATIONS. YOU CAN SEE THE FOREFRONT DOORS THEY HAVE THERE. I UNDERSTAND THE DOORS AND I SEE THE SQUARE WINDOW ON THE, THE, THE END THERE. WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE BACKSIDE? THERE IS ONLY THIS, THIS ELEVATION IS EXACTLY MIRRORED ON THE BACKSIDE. AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE, THERE'S TWO SMALL WINDOWS. THEY DIDN'T MAKE IT IN HERE, BUT THEY'RE, YOU GET A COUPLE OF SQUARE WINDOWS. YEAH. AND REST OR DOORS. YEAH. ALRIGHT. UH, THIS IS ENOUGH, UH, FOR A FULL APPROVAL, LIKE DRAWING WISE, WOULDN'T THAT REALIZE I NEED TO SUBMIT MY ELEVATION SHEET? I THOUGHT IT WAS AT THE BACK OF THIS. OKAY. SO WE, WE WOULD NEED THAT, RIGHT? WE, WE WOULD NEED A COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT SET THAT WOULD BE ADEQUATE FOR PERMITTING. RIGHT. SO I GUESS THE APPLICANT'S REALLY MORE LOOKING INTO LIKE, YOU KNOW, CONTINUING THAT GUIDANCE THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER FISH IS, IS GIVING TODAY THE APPLICANT. UM, WOULD THIS BE SOMETHING WE CAN DO IN DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE? ANOTHER, UH, WELL, THE APPLICATION, THE 60 DAY PERIOD EXPIRES ON AUGUST THE 20TH. UM, THE APPLICANT HAS THE ABILITY TO POSTPONE THREE TIMES FOR UP TO 30 DAYS. UM, SO THE APPLICANT COULD ELECT TODAY TO POSTPONE, UM, SO THAT HE COULD ATTEND ANOTHER DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AND THEN COME AT A MEETING IN THE FUTURE. UM, BUT WE WOULD NEED THE APPLICANT TO DO THAT. IF THE APPLICANT DOESN'T WANT TO DO THAT, THEN THE COMMISSION WOULD NEED TO TAKE ACTION. WELL, I'M JUST FEELING THAT, UM, I THINK THE APPLICANT IS UNDERSTANDING THE GUIDELINES AND IT'S REALLY, UM, OPEN TO WORK WITH US, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE THERE'S SOME ITEMS THAT ARE STILL MISSING, YOU KNOW, AND, AND THE DRAWINGS, I'M NOT SURE, UH, AN APPROVAL WOULD BE, UM, DID IT TODAY BY THIS COMMISSION, ESPECIALLY FOR THE BACK BUILDING. I THINK THE FRONT BUILDING HAD THE ELEVATIONS AND THE MORE, THERE'S MORE DRAWINGS TO LOOK AT FOR THE FRONT BUILDING. IT'S BACK BUILDINGS CHANGES WHERE MORE THAN I, WELL THERE'S STILL TWO PROPERTIES. TWO, I MEAN, IT'S TWO, TWO ITEMS ON THIS APPLICATION. WE GOTTA LOOK AT BOTH OF THEM. WE CAN'T JUST APPROVE ONE AND NOT THE OTHER OR, OKAY. I MEAN, WE COULD, MAY BE ABLE TO DO JUST THAT, BUT I THINK MAYBE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO WALK AWAY FROM HERE IS, UH, WHETHER THERE'S GONNA BE SUPPORT FOR A PROJECT YES. PROJECT. UM, A D R C. ONE MORE THING THAT THE, EXCUSE ME. ONE THING THAT THE COMMISSION COULD DO AS AN ACTION WOULD BE POSSIBLY TO, UH, APPROVE A CONCEPTUAL, GIVE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. WOULD THAT, UH, RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF THE TIMELINE? THE, THE, THAT COULD BE AN ACTION FROM THE COMMISSION. UM, BUT I, WE WILL JUST REMIND THAT EITHER THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO POSTPONE TO A SPECIFIC DATE OR THE COMMISSION WOULD NEED TO TAKE ACTION TODAY. OUR ACTION COULD BE A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. CORRECT. I DON'T THINK IT'S, UH, IN, IN, IN ADVANTAGE FOR THE APPLICANT FOR US TO JUST APPROVE ONE AND, AND DENY THE OTHER. SO I AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK THERE'S, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S DEVELOPING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I'M GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE. IT'S, UH, IT DOES SEEM TO BE THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE BEING VERY CREATIVE WITH THE, THE GUIDELINES AND, AND RESULTING IN A VERY INTERESTING, UH, ASSEMBLAGE OF BUILDINGS HERE AND EXTERIOR SPACES AS WELL. AND I THINK THE SCALE IS SYMPATHETIC TO THE HISTORIC BUILDING THAT'S THERE. UM, AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE GETTING A HANDLE ON THE, UH, OPEN SPACE VERSUS, UH, STRUCTURED SPACE. I, I, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE DEVELOPMENT TO THAT REAR BUILDING BEFORE I'D FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH ANYTHING MORE THAN A CONCEPTUAL. I ALSO, UM, ON ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK, UH, THE APPLICANT REALLY SHOULD FOCUS ON IS, UM, INCORPORATION OF THE TRADITIONAL MATERIALS. AND, AND I GUESS, I MEAN THE PARTY BOARD, THE FOUR INCH OF EIGHT INCH ONE WOULD DEPEND ON THE OTHER. I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN JUST DO FOUR INCH AND ONE AND EIGHT ON THE OTHER ONE. ONE, RIGHT? OH, IT'D BE THE SAME. SO I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR BOTH, UM, THE ROOF MENTS, THE WINDOWS. I THINK THERE'S LACK OF FENESTRATIONS IN SOME [01:10:01] OF THE SIDES. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CONTEXT OF NOT ONLY THE FOUR HOMES, BUT ALSO, UM, LIKE BEHIND THAT CARPORT STRUCTURE, WHAT'S THERE? MM-HMM. . OH, LIKE THE BACKYARD. OH YEAH. SO THE EMPTY SPACE ON THE, SO JUST PAGE DOWN WHAT'S GOING ON? LIKE I CAN JUST LIKE I DID ON 9 22, JUST DRAW THAT FOOTPRINT DOWN THERE. OKAY. I CAN DO THAT. ABOUT THE COMMENT ABOUT THE FRONT DOORS AND THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT ELEVATION ON BUILDING ONE. WHEN YOU SEE, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT LIKE IF, CAN I MOVE FORWARD IN THIS DIRECTION OF THE WINDOW DOOR, DOOR WINDOW ON THE FRONT ELEVATION? UM, LIKE WHAT, HOW LIKE THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL PHASE VERSUS FINAL APPROVAL, CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WOULD, UM, ALLOW YOU, UH, WELL, IT'D GIVE YOU SOME ASSURANCE THAT THE, THE, THE THREE STRUCTURES THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING WOULD, UH, PROBABLY BE APPROVED AS A FINAL, UH, REQUEST FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE DETAILS. YEAH. UM, THE MASSING, UH, BASICALLY WOULD BE APPROVED UNDER CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. SO IT, UM, I THINK THAT WOULD GIVE YOU SOME ASSURANCE THAT, UH, PROCEEDING WITH I CAN MOVE FORWARD, MOVING FORWARD WITH THE, THE THREE SMALLER STRUCTURES AND, UH, GENERALLY THE DIRECTION YOU'RE GOING. OKAY. WITH OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE, I THINK YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO WORK A LITTLE BIT ADDRESSING THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S TWO PROPERTIES ON EACH SIDE AND I THINK THAT, UM, I DON'T SEE THE RELATION BETWEEN YOUR DESIGN AND THOSE PROPERTIES, SO YOU MAY OKAY, I'LL BRING THE PHOTOS. COOL. I CAN DO THAT. SO THE APPLICANT HAS A CHOICE. I MEAN, WE'RE KIND OF, I FEEL LIKE, UM, I COULD, YOU KNOW, EITHER DO A CONCEPTUAL OR LIKE STAFF MENTIONED YOU COULD WITHDRAW AND COME BACK AGAIN. YOU'RE WELCOME TO GO TO A D R C WITHOUT US TELLING YOU TO POSTPONING, RIGHT? NOT A WITHDRAW. YEAH. WELL, CAN I DO THE CONCEPTUAL, THE CONCEPTUAL ROUTE SO I CAN REPORT BACK THAT I, IT WAS THAT I DID SOMETHING, UM, THAT 'CAUSE I NEEDED THIS INPUT AND THEN POSTPONE MY FINAL APPROVAL? HOW DOES THAT WORK? I COME IN FOR FINAL, BUT YOU GUYS CAN GIMME CONCEPTUAL. IS THAT FINE? SO THE COMMISSION HAS THE OPTION TODAY TO ISSUE A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. UM, THE COMMISSION COULD ISSUE A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR ONE STRUCTURE OR TWO STRUCTURES OR THREE STRUCTURES. IT WOULD BE UP TO THE COMMISSION'S DISCRETION, THE OTHER STRUCTURES WOULD BE DENIED. UM, THE OTHER OPTION IS FOR YOU TO POSTPONE TO SAY, UM, THE SECOND HEARING IN AUGUST OR THE FIRST HEARING IN SEPTEMBER, THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO ATTEND THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGAIN TO GET ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK THAT YOU COULD PAIR WITH FEEDBACK THAT YOU'VE RECEIVED IN THE PAST AND TODAY, UM, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION OR, UM, ADDITIONAL CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AT THAT TIME. UM, IT, IT WOULD BE UP TO YOU IF YOU'D WANT TO POSTPONE, UM, AT THIS POINT, UM, THE COMMISSION COULD POTENTIALLY DENY. SO, UM, IT, IT, THAT'S COMPLETELY UP TO YOU. I FEEL COMFORTABLE IN MOTION TO CONCEPTUALLY APPROVE BOTH ITEM ONE AND TWO. UM, AND I RECOMMEND THE APPLICANT WORKING MORE ON THE DETAILS. I WILL ADD THE APPLICANT MENTIONED OR HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE ENTRANCES. UM, STAFF IS SPECIFICALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE LACK OF A DISTINGUISHABLE ENTRANCE AND THE LACK OF DISTINGUISHABLE ENTRANCE MASSING THAT'S FOUND ON HISTORIC STRUCTURES THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT. UM, EVEN IF THERE'S VISUALLY A SEPARATION OR FENESTRATION FOR AN ENTRANCE, THERE'S STILL NOT THE MASSING THAT HISTORIC ENTRANCES HAVE. UH, SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT STAFF WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE INCORPORATED AND THAT STAFF WOULD DEFINITELY COMMENT ON, UM, DURING A FUTURE APPLICATION. UM, MANY OF THE, UM, THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, HAS PROPOSED THAT STAFF HAS COMMENTED ON, UM, WHILE THE COMMISSION MAY ISSUE A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR THOSE AT THIS TIME, STAFF WILL COMMENT ON 'EM IN THE FUTURE. UM, SO, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT AND THE COMMISSION, UM, JUST THE FACT THAT A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL MAY BE ISSUED DOESN'T MEAN THAT STAFF WON WON'T, UH, COMMENT AND DENY AN APPLICATION OR RECOMMEND TO THE DENY AN APPLICATION IN THE FUTURE. WELL, I THINK ITEMS STIPULATIONS ONE AND TWO THAT TALK ABOUT, UM, THE ENTRANCE MASSING AND, UM, THE ROOF ELEMENTS, I DON'T THINK YOU'LL GET SUPPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITHOUT THOSE STIPULATIONS IN THERE. OKAY. WOULD YOU BE, UH, UH, WOULD YOU CONSIDER, UH, LOOKING AT THOSE TWO STIPULATIONS? YES. I'LL STUDY FURTHER. YEAH. WELL, I, I'M GONNA [01:15:01] NOT TRY TO CUT IT HERE, BUT JUST MAKE A GO OF THIS AND WE'LL SEE HOW IT GOES. UH, I MOVE FOR CONCEPTUAL, UH, CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE WITH ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS AND ITEM TWO WITH STIPULATIONS TWO, THREE, AND FOUR SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. WE WILL NOTE TO THE AUDIENCE THAT AGENDA ITEM B 25 5 0 4, KING WILLIAM AND B 26 1 0 4 BORG GUARD HAVE BEEN POSTPONED AND WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. ITEM 25 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. ITEM 24 WILL BE, EXCUSE ME, ITEM 26 1 0 4. BORG GUARD WILL BE HEARD ON AUGUST THE 21ST [B27 19-5844 Address/Description: 273 E ROSEWOOD AVE HDRC Case No.: 2019-441 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: Kenneth Such/SUCH KENNETH G & Magdalena Z. Request: Retaining wall City Council Dist.: 1] BEING ON TO AGENDA ITEM B 27 H G R CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 41 AT 2 7 3 EAST ROSEWOOD AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. DAF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE RETAINING WALL BASED ON FINDINGS A, A, A AND H WITH THE A THROUGH H WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE RETAINING WALL INCORPORATE THE SAME DESIGN DE DETAIL DETAILS AS THE EXISTING RETAINING WALL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING THE CURVE DETAIL WHERE THE EXISTING WALL MEETS THE PILLAR FRONTING GILLESPIE. TWO, THAT THE RETAINING WALL TERMINATE BEHIND OR TO THE NORTH OF THE EXISTING CONCRETE STEPS, FRONTING GILLESPIE, AND TURN THE CORNER TO MEET THE HOME. THREE, THAT THE RETAINING WALL BE LIMITED TO THE MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIRED TO RETAIN THE BERM ALONG GILLESPIE. THE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION THAT CLEARLY JUSTIFIES THE CHOSEN CHO CHOSEN HEIGHT, SUCH AS A LETTER FROM A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL, INCLUDING A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, CONTRACTOR, OR ENGINEER, OR THAT THE EXISTING BERM BE PRESERVED. FIVE, THAT THE EXISTING CONCRETE STEPS FRONT AND GILLESPIE BE RETAINED. UH, SIX, THAT THE RETAINING WILL NOT FEATURE A FRONT YARD FENCE. AND SEVEN, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT UPDATED DOCUMENTS REFLECTING THE ABOVE CHANGES TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO RECEIVING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THE APPLICANT HERE, PLEASE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. ROGER H BALD, GOOD TALKING TO YOU. CAN YOU, UH, GIVE US SOME INSIGHT AS TO WHAT'S MOTIVATING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS WALL? ARE YOU HAVING EROSIONAL PROBLEMS OR SECURITY ISSUES AND EROSION? FOR SURE. AND, UM, AND IT'S, UM, HOPING TO MOVE BACK TO SAN ANTONIO WHEN HE RETIRES, BUT A COUPLE OF TREES HAVE BEEN TAKEN OUT SHR RATHER IN A TREE. AND, UM, IT'S, UM, TRYING TO CUT THE GRASS. I SEE THE YARD SPAN. I DON'T CUT IT, BUT THE YARDMAN DO AND THEY ALMOST TOPPLE DOWN EVERY TIME BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY STEEP. BUT THE MAIN THING IS THE EROSION THERE. WERE THERE, UH, STIPULATIONS THAT STAFF PROVIDED THAT YOU DIDN'T, UH, PROVIDED EVERYTHING FOR YOU ON, I'LL JUST HAVE SOME OF THE PAPERWORK HERE. UH, WELL, MAYBE WE SHOULD IS SO THERE WASN'T A SPECIFIC STIPULATION THAT YOU WOULDN'T, YOU DIDN'T AGREE TO? WELL, UH, HE WANTS, UH, A FOUR FOOT STONE FENCE AND I THINK, UH, Y'ALL SAID, OR RATHER THE COMMITTEE SAID MAYBE TWO, BUT THEY WILL STILL HAVE A BERM. AND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO EVEN IT OUT SO THE, THE YARD CAN BE ENJOYED AND BE TAKEN CARE OF. I JUST CLARIFY, UM, STAFF'S NOT RECOMMENDING THAT THE, UM, RETAINING WALL BE LIMITED TO FOUR FEET. WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE LIMITED TO THE MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIRED TO RETAIN THE BERM. SO IT WOULD TAKE ITS CUES FROM WHAT'S PREVALENT IN THAT IN THE DISTRICT. YEAH. ADAM, DO YOU ACTUALLY MIND FLIPPING TO THE IMAGE THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING RETAINING WALL BY THE DRIVEWAY? UM, NO. TAKEN FROM THE DRIVEWAY SIDE. UM, YEAH, SO THAT'S AN EXISTING RETAINING WALL ON THE SITE, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE, UM, EVEN AT ONE OF THE TALLER PORTIONS, IT'S, IT'S NOT QUITE EVEN FOUR FEET TO RETAIN THAT EXISTING BERM. UM, SO WE WOULD RECOMMEND A COUPLE THINGS. UM, ONE THAT, UM, WHERE YOU SEE THERE'S A PILLAR KIND OF AT THE CORNER THAT, THAT, THAT PILLAR REMAINED, SORT REMAINS SORT OF THE TALL POINT OF THE WALL. UM, AND THAT, UM, PERHAPS A LOWER WALL, UH, FOLLOW THE SIDEWALK TOWARDS THE PORCH. UM, AND THEN ANOTHER STIPULATION [01:20:01] IS THAT INSTEAD OF THE, UM, RETAINING WALL GOING ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT OF THE PORCH, AS SHOWN IN THE SIDE PLAN THAT ACTUALLY TERMINATE, UM, WHERE YOU SEE THE EXISTING STEPS. AND SO WE'RE, WE'LL HAVE TO FLIP BACK TO YEAH. UM, SO THAT, THAT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. AND IT LOOKS LIKE ANOTHER, ANOTHER PIECE OF THIS MIGHT BE THAT YOU'RE NOT, UH, SUGGESTING THAT A FRONT YARD FENCE SHOULD BE PUT ON TOP OF THE WALL MAKING THAT, THAT'S CORRECT. I, I AGREE WITH, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS ON THIS. YOU AGREE TO THAT? WHAT IS THE VERDICT? DO WE GET THE, THE STONE FENCE? WELL, WHAT STAFF IS PROPOSING IS THAT A STONEWALL COULD BE BUILT ALONG THE SIDEWALK THERE THAT, UH, IT'D BE, UH, NO TALLER THAN STRUCTURALLY REQUIRED. UH, AND IT LOOKS LIKE IF THE, UH, AT THE COLUMN THAT'S AT THE, THE, UH, DRIVEWAY, THERE'S, UM, THE WALL THAT GOES BEHIND THERE, POSSIBLY THE, THAT PORTION WHERE THE SCOOP IS, THAT, THAT COULD BE THE HEIGHT OF THE WALL ALONG THE SIDEWALK AND THEN DOWN THE, THE WALL WOULD STOP AT, UM, THIS SIDE OF THE STEPS. STEPS. YES. WE KNOW THAT. OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN WITHOUT A, UH, FENCE ON TOP OF THE WALL, RIGHT? THAT THAT'S WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, IF I THAT'S CORRECT. UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY. AND I, I CONCUR WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH AS WELL, THAT THE, I THINK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, ARE, UH, RIGHT ON, UH, THE MONEY HERE. AND I WOULD MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS SECOND. A MOTION A SECOND FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? JUST, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT THE EXISTING BERM BE PRESERVED. RETAINING WALL IS ELIMINATING THE BERM. WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT STIPULATION CONCERN WAS JUST THAT, THAT BE RETAINED AS A FEATURE. IT'S, UM, I MEAN, THE RETAINING WALL COULD BE SO TALL THAT IT OBSTRUCTS IT OR, YOU KNOW, ELIMINATES IT ESSENTIALLY JUST THAT WE'RE, WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING THAT IT BE RETAINED. THERE WOULD BE SOME SLOPE, BUT NOT THE FULL SLOPE. YOU SEE. NOW ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM [B28 19-5800 Address/Description: 324 ADAMS ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-432 Landmark Name: Jehl House Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Niria Trevino/MONTOYA LISA J & TREVINO NIRIA Request: Chimney removal City Council Dist.: 1] B 28 H H G R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 32 AT 3 24 ADAM STREET, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH A BRICK CHIMNEY ON THE PRIMARY RESTRUCTURE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION OF THE CHIMNEY BASED ON FINDINGS A AND B STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CHIMNEY BE INSTEAD STABILIZED AND REPAIRED IN KIND. GOOD AFTERNOON, AL. MY NAME IS TREVINO AND I'M HERE TO DISCUSS THE REMOVAL OF THE CHIMNEY ON OUR ROOF ON 3 24 ADAMS. UH, BASED ON THE O H P REPORT, THE HOUSE HAS GONE THROUGH SUBSTANTIAL ALTERATIONS BETWEEN 1924 TO 51 WITH TWO ADDITIONS AFTER 1951. THESE CHANGES HAVE GONE FROM A VICTORIAN STYLE TO WHAT IT IS TODAY, A MEDITERRANEAN REVIVAL STYLE. DURING ONE OF THE REMODELS, THE FIREPLACES WERE REMOVED, BUT IT WAS INCOMPLETE. EXCUSE ME, BECAUSE ONE OF THE CHIMNEY IS STILL UP. THE CHIMNEY HAS NO CONTEXT WITH THE STYLE THAT IT IS TODAY. THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THAT THE CHIMNEY IS LIKELY ORIGINAL IN A CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURE, BUT IT IS NO LONGER AESTHETICALLY FAITHFUL TO THE CURRENT DESIGN AND LOOKS AT A PLACE. UH, THIS IS NO LONGER A VICTORIAN STYLE HOUSE WITH A FUNCTIONING FIREPLACE. ALSO THE CHIMNEY IS A HAZARD. IT'S UNSTABLE AS WE'VE HAD SOME BRICKS FALL ONTO THE DRIVEWAY, MAKING IT DANGEROUS TO PARK OR WALK BEYOND THE CARPORT. IT'S ALSO LEANING AS IN AS A RESULT. WE'VE HAD WATER DAMAGE INSIDE THE HOUSE. WE AGREE WITH O H P IN THAT THE HOUSE IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TO THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC DISTRICT AND ARE ALSO DOING OUR BEST TO MAINTAIN AND RESTORE OUR HOME TO BRING IT BACK TO LIFE. AFTER SO MANY YEARS OF NEGLECT, WE'VE INVESTED IN THE FOUNDATION, COMPLETE ELECTRICAL, REWIRING, PLUMBING, AC INSULATION, ADDITIONAL BATHROOM, COMPLETE KITCHEN, [01:25:01] AND WE FINISHED THE ORIGINAL FLOORING ON THE INSIDE. WE KEPT AS MANY STUCCO WALLS AS POSSIBLE, EVEN THE CROOKED ONES. , WE FEEL LIKE WE LIVE IN A GAUDY HOUSE. PRESENTLY. WE ARE REPLACING THE ROOF. WE'VE DONE PARTIAL FLAT ROOF, ADDING INSULATION, AND THE NEXT THING, UH, THE NEXT WILL BE FINISH THE REST OF THE FLAT ROOF AND REMOVING AND REPLACING THE METAL ROOF. AFTER THIS, WE WILL FOCUS ON THE STUCCO REPAIRS. I'M A RETIRED TEACHER ON A PENSION AND REBUILDING A NON-FUNCTIONING CHIM, WE'LL JUST ADD TO OUR COST. REMOVING IT IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN OUR CONTRACT, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT WILL RE MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE CURRENT ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE BOARD OR THE COMMISSION TO GIVE US PERMISSION TO REMOVE THE CHIMNEY. THANK YOU. REPEAT, UM, THE CONDITION OF THE CHIMNEY BELOW THE ROOF LINE. DOES THIS TERMINATE IN THE ATTIC? DOES IT COME THROUGH TO THE FLOOR? GO TO THE GROUND? I, I KNOW IT'S ON THE GROUND BECAUSE THE PLUMBERS HAD TO GO AROUND THE, THE, THE, TO PUT THE PLUMBING AND, BUT THE ATTIC, I, I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW THERE IS SOME STILL CONNECTED TO THE GROUND. YES. IT'S NOT FLOATING. UH, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. SO, IN MANY CASES WHEN, WHEN FLUES OR CHIMNEY STACKS LIKE THIS, WHICH ARE CHARACTERIZED, UH, CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES ARE LOST, A LOT OF TIMES A STRUCTURE IS BUILT IN THE ATTIC TO SUPPORT AND MAINTAIN THE CHIMNEY. OH, LET'S SAY A FIREPLACE MAY OR MAY NOT EXIST BENEATH IT. MM-HMM. ASKING WHAT'S HAPPENING BENEATH IT. I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. SO THERE'S NO VISIBLE FIREPLACE WITHIN THE INTERIOR? NO. IT'S BEEN REMOVED. AND IS THERE ANY, UH, BUMP OUT OR FUR OUT, UH, IN THE WALLS? UH, NO. PERCEIVED, NO. I TOOK A PICTURE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA SEE THE WALL. IT WAS JUST A WALL OF FOUR WALLS. YEAH. AND, AND NORMALLY WE DON'T, UM, YOU KNOW, OUR PURVIEW DOESN'T EXTEND INTO THE INTERIOR, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH ACTUALLY ANTICIPATE WHAT MY QUESTION WAS BECAUSE, UH, MY CONCERN ABOUT IT, IF IT DID GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH, IS THAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY BECOME SOMETHING THAT COULD, UH, UM, UNDERMINE THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE IF IT'S MOVING AT A DIFFERENT RATE OR IN, IN DIFFERENT MANNER THAN THE REST OF THE HOUSE. RIGHT. AND, UH, TRYING TO PUT A NEW ROOF ON THAT, THAT WOULD BE SORT OF A DIFFICULT THING TO DO. UM, THE, ALL THE CONTRACTOR SAID WAS THAT IF IT'S, IF WE'RE GIVING PERMISSION FOR REMOVAL, THIS, IT'S, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO OF COURSE COVER IT. 'CAUSE I SAID YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A HOLE. SO I THINK THE APPLICANT MAKES A PRETTY COMPELLING ARGUMENT ABOUT, UM, THE TRANSFORMATION STYLISTICALLY THAT THIS HOUSE HAS GONE THROUGH. UH, GENERALLY I CONSIDER THE, UH, FIREPLACES AND FLUS TO BE A PRETTY IMPORTANT CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURE, BUT THIS ONE'S SOMEWHAT OBSCURED BACK BEHIND, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. RIGHT. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I I, I COULD SEE FOR THE, UH, FOR THE SAKE OF THE GREATER GOOD OF, OF PRESERVING THE HOUSE AND, AND NOT HAVING THIS BECOME, UM, A PROBLEM, UH, WITH THE, UH, INTEGRITY OF, OF THE HOUSE LONG TERM. UM, I COULD SEE THIS TO BE AN APPROPRIATE, UH, RESPONSE. IS THAT A MOTION? IT WAS MORE OF A DISCUSSION. WHAT, WHAT I HEAR WHAT THE REST OF Y'ALL HAVE TO SAY. I DO. I AGREE. AND, UM, AND I THINK, UM, WE DO NORMALLY DON'T ALLOW FOR THIS, BUT THE, THIS CHANGE IN STYLE, THE HOME, I THINK IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT. UM, I WOULD, I WOULD, UM, I, I MOVE TO APPROVE SECOND, AND I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL. FURTHER DISCUSSION. I'LL, I'LL, I'LL PROBABLY BE THE ONLY DISSENTER HERE, BUT, UM, THE, THE LOSS OF THESE, UH, FLUES WHEN THEY'RE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET IS SOMETHING THAT COMES UP A NUMBER OF TIMES. I, I, I WOULD FAVOR A RECONSTRUCTION OF IT ABOVE THE ROOF LINE ONLY. IN OTHER WORDS, CONSTRUCTION FROM, UH, STRUCTURE THAT'S PUT UP IN THE ATTIC. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. [01:30:01] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 29 360 7. QUENTIN HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. WE'LL NOW MOVE [B30 19-5869 Address/Description: 930 HAYS ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-400 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Chris Coker/BLUE LINE HOUSING LLC Request: Fenestration changes; door replacement, railing installation, column replacement City Council Dist.: 2] TO AGENDA ITEM 30 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 19 409 30 HAYES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO PERFORM VARIOUS EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE AT NINE 30. HAYES. WITHIN THIS REQUEST, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED THE FOLLOWING, ONE, TO MODIFY THE EAST ELEVATION BY ENCLOSING AN EXISTING NON-ORIGINAL DOOR IN THE REAR ADDITION AND MODIFYING ORIGINAL WINDOW OPENING INTO A DOOR OPENING TWO TO REPLACED THE EXISTING RODAR COLUMNS WITH TURNED WOOD COLUMNS. AND THREE, TO INSTALL PORCH RAILINGS ON THE EXISTING PORCH. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS TO THE EAST FACADE BASED ON FINDING. B. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT AT LEAST ONE DOOR OPENING REMAIN AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS THAT THE COLUMN THAT A COLUMN B DETAIL IS SUBMITTED TO O H P STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS COLUMN SHOULD FEATURE CAPITAL AND BASE TRIM AS WELL AS CHAMFORD CORNERS. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM THREE, INSTALLATION OF PORCH RAILINGS BASED ON FINDING D THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. HI, MY NAME'S ANDRESS VELOS. I'M REPRESENTING THE OWNER AT NINE 30 HAYES. UM, SO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO ON THE MODIFICATION ON THE DOOR IS THIS, UH, STRUCTURE WAS A DUPLEX. AND WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE TURNING IT BACK TO A SINGLE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOME. SO THE BACK DOOR IS, UM, WE WANNA MOVE THAT DOOR TO THE FRONT WHERE ONE OF THE WINDOWS IS, UH, USE THE EXISTING OPENING. UM, AND THAT WOULD BE THE LOCATION OF THE DOOR. WE WOULD THEN CLOSE OFF THE BACK DOOR, MOVE THAT AWNING ALONG WITH THE, UH, NEW DOOR. AND THEN WE WOULD ADD THE STEPS TO THE NEW DOOR. UH, THE MIDDLE IS ALREADY CLOSED OUT. IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT FOR YEARS. IN THE INSIDE THERE'S NOTHING, UH, SO THERE'S, AT ONE POINT THEY TOOK THAT DOOR AND REMOVED IT. UH, AND WE'RE TRYING TO ELIMINATE THAT AND JUST CLOSE IT OFF WITH SIDING, THE EXISTING SIDING THAT THAT'S THERE. COULD YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN, SPECIFICALLY? WHICH DOOR YOU'RE TRYING TO, UH, ELIMINATE? THE BACK DOOR IS THE ONE ON THE LEFT IN THAT ONE? YEAH. THE, THAT DOOR THAT HAS, IT'S THE ONLY DOOR RIGHT THERE. UH, WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE THE, ELIMINATE THAT AND MOVE IT OVER TO WHERE THAT WINDOW IS, RIGHT THERE. USE THE SAME OPENING. WE WOULD PUT, THE OPENING IS ABOUT 33 INCHES WE WOULD USE ABOUT, UH, WE WOULD PROBABLY USE A 32 INCH DOOR. UM, SO THAT WAY THAT WOULD BE THE NEW LOCATION OF THE DOOR. WHY, WHY CAN'T YOU USE, WHY CAN'T YOU LOCATE THE NEW DOOR WHERE THE PREVIOUS DOOR EXISTED AND WAS COVERED UP? THE ONE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE? 'CAUSE THAT BACK ROOM IS, UH, GONNA BE, IT'S GONNA BE A BEDROOM. SO THAT WOULD BE THE, A DOOR IN THE BEDROOM. FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, UM, ESSENTIALLY OUR RECOMMENDATION, IT MAY BE WORDED A BIT ODD TO WHERE WE SAY STAFF FINDS THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD KEEP ONE EXISTING DOOR. UM, BUT, UH, IN SUMMARY, THAT'S WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT, UM, THE HOUSE CURRENTLY HAS TWO DOORS, UM, WITH THE NEED FOR A REAR DOOR STAFF FINDS THAT ONE OF THE EXISTING DOOR OPENINGS, UM, IT, IT WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE THAT THAT REMAINS, UM, A BIT OF HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR THIS HOUSE. UM, THE STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1910. UM, IT'S FIRST ON THE 1912 SANBORN MAP. UM, ONE OF THESE DOORS IS FOUND ON THE 1912 SANBORN MAP. AND THEN, UM, THIS IS THE 1912 SANBORN MAP. AND THEN, UM, THE ADDITIONAL DOOR IS FOUND ON THE 1951 SANBORN MAP WHEN THE ADDITIONAL, UH, REAR UNIT WAS CONSTRUCTED. UM, OR AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT STAFF BELIEVES FROM THE STAND BORN MAPS. UM, BUT JUST IN SUMMARY, STAFF FINDS THAT ONE OF THESE TWO OPENINGS SHOULD REMAIN AS THEY ARE. UM, SO THAT, UM, AND RATHER THAN ENCLOSING AND THEN CREATING A NEW DOOR OPENING, ONE OF THE TWO EXISTING DOOR OPENINGS IS UTILIZED WHICHEVER DOOR IS NOT USED. UM, AND WE ALSO LOOK AT THE FRONT. WAS THERE A REMOVAL OF A DOOR THERE PRIOR? THAT'S BEEN QUITE SOME TIME SINCE THAT DOOR WAS, WAS THERE. AND THE WINDOWS, THOSE WINDOWS HAVE ALSO, THEY, IT'S BEEN QUITE A WHILE SINCE THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS WERE LOCATED HERE. UM, TO STAFF'S KNOWLEDGE, NONE OF THIS WAS DONE [01:35:01] RECENTLY. UM, AND NONE OF THIS WAS DONE BY THE CURRENT APPLICANT. SO MOST ORIGINAL, HOW, UH, DOOR IS THE ONE TO THE RIGHT ONE THAT THE APPLICANT IS INTENDING TO KEEP? SORRY? THE DOOR, THE DOOR TO THE RIGHT. IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE TWO DOORS ON THE SIDE, THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S THE MOST ORIGINAL. RIGHT? ACCORDING TO THE SANDBORN MAP? CORRECT. PER, PER THE SANDBORN MAP, THE DOOR TO THE RIGHT IS THE DOOR. THAT'S THE OLDEST. AND THEN THE DOOR ON THE LEFT IS THE DOOR THAT IS SHOWN ON THE 1950 OR THE DOOR THAT WOULD RELATE TO THE ADDITION SHOWN ON THE 1951 SANDBAR MAP. WHAT WILL, UH, THE APPLICANT TO THE APPLICANT, WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH THE WINDOW THAT YOU'RE, UH, WELL THOSE WINDOWS ARE VINYL WINDOWS. SO THEY OH, THE WINDOW THAT YOU'LL BE REMOVING AND REPLACING WITH THE DOOR? YEAH. YEAH. SO THAT'S A VINYL WINDOW. UH, WHAT THEY DID IS THEY HAD FOUR, THOSE TWO WINDOWS YOU SEE ARE VINYL. WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS, IS TURN 'EM BACK INTO THE ORIGINAL, UH, WOOD WINDOWS. SO THAT ONE WINDOW WE PULL OUT WOULD BE VINYL. SO WE WOULDN'T USE IT 'CAUSE IT'S NOT HISTORIC OR ANYTHING. UH, WE'D PROBABLY PUT IT TO THE SIDE AND USE THAT OPENING FOR THE NEW DOOR DOOR LOCATION. AND PLAN WISE, WHAT PREVENTS YOU FROM RETAINING THE, THE DOOR THAT IS TO THE LEFT IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH AND THE PHOTOGRAPHS? WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THE ONE THAT THE FAR BACK, THE FAR BACK ONE? YEAH. UH, JUST BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE, THAT'S GONNA BE A BEDROOM, UH, A MASTER. AND SO HAVING THAT LOCATION THERE WITH ALL THE WINDOWS, I JUST, WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT A DOOR WOULD BE GOOD IN A, A MASTER BEDROOM. SO THAT MASTER BEDROOM EXTENDS ACROSS THE WHOLE AREA. MM-HMM. WHERE THE, THESE TWO DOORS WERE ORIGINALLY. OKAY. AND WHEN YOU REMOVE THE ONE WINDOW, PUT THE DOOR IN, SO YOU'RE GOING TO GO BACK AND PUT SIDING OR WINDOWS OR WHAT INTO THE, THE LOCATION OF THE DOORS? UH, WE ARE GONNA DO SIDING. WE'RE GONNA CLOSE IT OFF AND DO, UH, THE SAME MATCHING SIDING THERE. UH, AND WE WOULD, WE WOULD TAKE THAT AWNING THAT'S ON TOP OF THE DOOR AND WE WOULD JUST MOVE IT ALONG WITH THE NEW DOOR. WE WOULD USE, UM, SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE AREA, THE HISTORIC DOOR FOR THE SIDE. AND, AND THAT WOULD BE THE NEW LOCATION AND THE WINDOW THAT IS BOARDED UP BETWEEN THE TWO DOORS, THAT, THAT IS, UH, THE WINDOWS THAT ARE BOARDED UP, UH, WE ARE RESTORING. SO YOU ARE THE WINDOW DOOR? YES. WE, THEY'RE JUST BOARDED UP BECAUSE THE WINDOW PANES ARE, ARE BUSTED. I THINK I NOW UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, . YES. WHAT IS ON THE INTERIOR WHERE YOU WANNA PUT THE NEW DOOR? THAT IS THE, UH, LOCATION OF THE KITCHEN. SO THEY WOULD WALK IN, UH, WE WERE GONNA DO A SIDE FENCE THERE. SO THEY WOULD WALK IN AND IT WOULD BE JUST, UH, THEY WOULD WALK INTO A KITCHEN. SO WOULD YOU BE ADDING ANY KIND OF A PORCH OR LANDING ON THE EXTERIOR THERE? YES. UH, WELL WE WOULD ADD STEPS FOR THEY, UH, FOR THEM TO GO DOWN. UM, WE COULD ADD A LANDING AND, AND SOME, A LITTLE DECK AREA IF APPROVED. WHAT IS THE, UM, THE BOARDED UP AREA RIGHT TO THE RIGHT OF THE RIGHTMOST DOOR THERE? IT'S A WINDOW ALSO. AND ARE YOU PLANNING ON JUST PUTTING SIDING THERE AS WELL? SO WE LOOSE? NO, WE'RE S RESTORING THAT WINDOW ALSO. SO ALL THE WINDOWS ARE STAIN, UM, THAT ARE BOARDED UP. SO YOUR RESULTANT WILL BE, YOU'LL HAVE A WINDOW, THEN SIDING, AND THEN WINDOW, AND THEN SIDING, AND THEN WINDOW, AND THEN, THEN, THEN THE DOOR. YES, SIR. THERE'S A IF, UH, UM, STAFF OR MR. HALL YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH HIS, UH, DRAWING. I GUESS THAT EXPLAINS A LITTLE BIT. ARE YOU DOING ANY CHANGES ON THE BACK? NO. HOUSE? NO. EVERYTHING'S SAME. SO IN THIS ELEVATION, THE, UM, LEFT THREE WINDOWS, THOSE ARE ALL EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS? YES. THEN THE ONE ON THE FAR RIGHT IS A VINYL WINDOW THAT YOU WERE GOING TO REPLACE WITH THE WOOD WINDOW. THAT YEAH, THAT IS A VINYL WINDOW WHERE WE WOULD PUT THE NEW LOCATION OF THE DOOR. NO, BUT THE, THE ONE TO THE RIGHT OF THAT. OH, YES, YES. THAT ONE, YES. THAT'S [01:40:01] A ALSO A VINYL. SO WE, WE'LL RESTORE THAT BACK TO WOOD FOR WOOD. YES, SIR. OKAY. SO I'M ACTUALLY GONNA, YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE GONNA DO ONE DOOR ONLY. YOU'RE NOT GONNA KEEP THE OTHER ONE. THERE IS ONLY ONE DOOR, THE OTHER ONE WAS CLOSED OFF. THAT'S WHAT STAFF WAS TRYING TO SAY, RIGHT? I MEAN, YOU WANTED TO RETAIN TWO DOORS. N NO, ESSENTIALLY WHAT STAFF HAS SAID IS THAT IF THE APPLICANT'S GOING TO MODIFY, WE WOULD FIND THAT AT LEAST ONE DOOR OPENING REMAIN. UM, AND BY ONE DOOR OPENING, WE MEAN ONE EXISTING DOOR OPENING. UM, RATHER THAN, AS THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED, THERE'S STILL A DOOR OPENING, BUT IT'S NOT IN AN ORIGINAL LOCATION. SO STAFF WOULD BE OKAY IF ONE OF THE ORIGINAL DOOR OPENINGS REMAINED. UM, ANOTHER OPTION FOR THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER, UM, THERE MAY TAKE SOME FINESSING ON THE INTERIOR, BUT WOULD ESSENTIALLY TO BE TO BUILD A FUR WALL, UM, OVER ONE OF THE EXISTING DOOR OPENINGS. UM, SO ESSENTIALLY FROM THE INTERIOR, UM, YOU WOULD LOSE FOUR TO SIX INCHES, BUILD A FUR WALL, THE INTERIOR, THEY WOULDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS A DOOR THERE. THE EXTERIOR WOULD LOOK THE SAME AND YOU COULD JUST SEAL THE DOOR AND FLASH IT, UM, TO KEEP WATER OUT. UM, THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER OPTION. UM, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT STAFF COULD WORK WITH THE APPLICANT ON ADMINISTRATIVELY. UM, HOWEVER, FOR ANY OF THE, THE, UM, MODIFICATIONS TO OPENINGS OR MOVING THE DOORS AROUND THAT WOULD NEED ACTION HERE TODAY. SO IS WHAT, WHAT IF YOU JUST MAINTAINED THAT DOOR THAT WAS THE MOST ORIGINAL ON THE 1930 SANDBORN MAP? UH, THE DOOR IS, UH, IT'S NOT THAT ONE YOU'RE SAYING THAT ALSO FALLS INTO THE AREA OF THE RESTROOM THAT WE'RE BUILDING. SO THAT WOULD BE A MASTER AND THEN A WALK, AND THEN YOU GO IN AND THAT'S, UH, THAT DOORWAY IS THE MASTER BATHROOM, WHICH IS A CLOSET. SO IT WOULDN'T WORK OUT. I'M, I'M, I'M NOT, UM, I'M NOT TOO KEEN ON, ON, YOU KNOW, MODIFYING THOSE TWO WINDOW FENESTRATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY EXISTING TO THE RIGHT OF THE HOUSE. UM, I WOULD BE MORE LEANING TOWARDS KEEPING THAT, UH, ORIGINAL DOOR AND MAYBE REMOVING THE, THE OTHER DOOR THAT'S BETWEEN THE TWO WINDOWS ON THE ADDITION. BUT I'M NOT, I I WOULDN'T MODIFY THOSE TWO WINDOW FENESTRATIONS ON THAT SIDE. SO, YOU KNOW, ONE THING I'M TRYING TO FIND A PHILOSOPHICAL TOEHOLD, UH, FOR THIS PROJECT TO, TO ALLOW THESE WINDOWS AND DOORS TO BE FLO FLOPPING AROUND. AND, UM, I'M, I'M HAVING A LOT OF DIFFICULTY WITH THAT, WITH WITHIN THE STANDARDS OF THE GUIDELINES. AND, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, HISTORICALLY THE WINDOW AND DOOR OPENINGS RELATED TO INTERIOR SPACES, WHICH IS NOT OUR PURVIEW, BUT IN A SENSE, WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED BEHIND THESE EXTERIOR WINDOWS AND DOORS IS IN SUCH COUNTER, UM, RELATIONSHIP TO THE HISTORIC FACADE OF THE BUILDING THAT IT DOES BEGIN TO, UH, HAVE AN EFFECT OVER, YOU KNOW, HOW ONE, UM, ANALYZES THIS. AND I THINK GIVEN THE SORT OF THE FORCED NATURE OF HAVING TO, UH, FIGURE OUT WITH THE DOORS VERSUS THE WINDOWS, AND ALSO GIVEN THE, I THINK THE LITTLE BIT LACKING ON DOCUMENTATION FOR THE DRAWINGS, THAT'S WHY WE WERE ASKING YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT, 'CAUSE THE DRAWINGS WEREN'T QUITE MAKING SENSE FOR ME. I, I HAVE A HARD TIME RECOMMENDING THIS, UH, UH, THIS APPROACH WHERE WE JUST SORT OF ARBITRARILY SWAP OUT DOORS AND WINDOWS AND, UH, SO I, I WOULD, I'D GIVE DENIAL RIGHT NOW, OR AT LEAST MAYBE ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME TO A D R C MEETING. CAN I, CAN I SAY SOMETHING? YEAH. AND TO, TO, TO MAYBE, UH, WORK THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THIS A LITTLE BIT CLOSER. YEAH. CAN I SAY SOMETHING ELSE? WHAT IF WE KEEP, UH, 'CAUSE STAFF IS SAYING WE CAN, UH, KEEP ONE EXISTING DOOR. WHAT IF WE KEEP THE MIDDLE LOCATION, UH, DOOR AND, AND MAYBE DO WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING AND, AND ADD THE OTHER DOOR ON THE, WHERE THE VINYL WINDOW IS? SO WE WILL STILL HAVE THE SAME TWO DOORS ON THE SIDE. UH, ALL WE'RE DOING IS JUST MOVING THE AWNING OVER WITH THE NEW DOOR. YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THAT BEGINS TO GET CLOSER TO A SOLUTION BECAUSE THAT IS HISTORICALLY, UH, BASED UPON THE SANBORN MAPS, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE OR, OR AN ORIGINAL DOOR WAS THERE, OR AT LEAST NEAR ORIGINAL. AND ESSENTIALLY, I MEAN, THAT MAY ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO KEEP THE EXISTING OPENING, UM, AND HAVE A FAUX DOOR THERE AND CLOSE THAT IN, CREATE A NEW DOOR OPENING, UM, ON A NON-PRIMARY FACADE AWAY FROM THE FRONT FACADE THAT WOULD FACILITATE AN ENTRANCE AND EXIT INTO THE HOUSE. UM, ESSENTIALLY YOU WOULD WIND UP WITH THREE WINDOW OPENINGS THAT WERE UNMODIFIED AN ORIGINAL DOOR OPENING [01:45:01] THAT WAS UNMODIFIED, AND YOU WOULD WIND UP WITH THE, THE DOOR TO THE ADDITION AND THEN THE EXISTING WINDOW OPENING BEING MODIFIED. UM, THAT WOULD INCLUDE WHAT STAFF WOULD, WOULD ASK FOR. UM, IT WOULD BE AGAINST THE GUIDELINES IN A SENSE, BY MODIFYING AN EXISTING WINDOW OPENING. UM, BUT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE A COMPROMISE THAT THE COMMISSION AND THE APPLICANT COULD CONSIDER THAT MAY RESULT IN AN ACTION TODAY. I, I, I COULD ACCEPT THAT. ME TOO. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE PORCH, RAINING PORCH? UH, WE ARE TRYING TO, UH, WELL WE ARE GONNA PUT, REMOVE THE, UH, METAL COLUMNS. UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT SUPPORTING NOTHING. THEY'RE VERY WEAK. SO WE WANT TO GO WITH THE STYLE THAT'S AROUND THERE AND USE, UH, TURN COLUMNS. AND THEN WE WANTED TO WRAP, UH, USE THE EXISTING SLABS THAT'S THERE AND JUST WRAP IT PRETTY MUCH WITH, UH, SOME WOOD, THE WOOD, UH, DECKING AROUND THE, THE WOOD DECK, UH, RAILING. SO, UH, STAFF IS, IS GOOD WITH THE, UH, COLUMN REPLACEMENT, UM, WITH THE STIPULATION AS NOTED IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COLUMNS BE CHAMPED OR FEATURED CHAMPED CORNERS, CAPITAL AND BASE TRIM, WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS ALLUDED TO IN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. WE WOULD JUST NEED TO, UH, CONFIRM A DETAIL WHEN THE APPLICANT IS READY TO PULL A PERMIT FOR THAT. ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASONS WHY STAFF FOUND THE PORCH RAILING, MAYBE TO BE OUTSIDE OF WHAT'S APPROPRIATE. UM, SIMPLY BECAUSE THE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS PORCH HAS BEEN REPLACED. THERE'S A CONCRETE SLAB THERE NOW. UM, AND, UH, OVERALL, I MEAN THE FOLK VICTORIAN NATURE OF THIS HOUSE, THERE WOULDN'T ORIGINALLY HAVE BEEN, UM, A PORCH RAILING. UM, AND SO THAT'S, UH, THE PRIMARY REASON WHY STAFF ISN'T GIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS. THANK YOU. DO YOU KNOW HOW HIGH THE PORCH IS OFF THE GROUND? UH, THAT IS ABOUT TWO FOOT. IT'S A PORTER RAILING THERE. IF IT MET 30 INCHES FOR SAFETY, HISTORICALLY, THERE WASN'T ONE HERE. AND IT DOESN'T SEEM THE HEIGHT THAT WOULD REQUIRE RAIL FOR SAFETY AND FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY. YOU CAN ADD, ADD PLANTING AROUND THE, UH, THE PERIMETER OF THE PORCH SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T FEEL LIKE IT'S A, IT'S A DANGER. BUT I, I THINK IT, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. WELL, LEMME SEE IF I CAN DO THIS. UM, UH, A MOVE FOR APPROVAL, UH, BASED UPON TODAY'S DISCUSSION WITH THE, UM, REMOVAL, IF WE, IF WE CAN GO TO THAT ELEVATION. SO I CAN LOOK AT THAT AS I TRY TO FORMULATE THIS, THIS, UH, YEAH, WITH THE RETENTION OF THE THREE WINDOWS AND THEIR RESTORATION TO WOOD OR WOOD, UH, ALUMINUM CLOUD, WOOD WINDOWS, UM, THE REMOVAL OF THE LEFTMOST, UH, DOOR IN THIS ILLUSTRATION, THE RETENTION OF THE RIGHT DOOR, UH, OPENING, UM, AS A, UH, FIXED AND FLASHED STRUCTURE. AND THEN THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE RIGHTMOST WINDOW IN THIS ILLUSTRATION WITH THE DOORWAY THEN. AND THEN ITEMS TWO AND THREE, AS WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SO YOU'RE DENYING ITEM NUMBER THREE? YES. DENYING ITEM NUMBER THREE. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AS NOTED. I'M NOT GONNA TRY TO REPEAT THAT. UH, YEAH. AND FOR, FOR THE, THE RECORDING, THE ILLUSTRATION THAT I'M REFERENCING IS, UM, CAN STAFF HELP ME ON WHAT PAGE NUMBER OR WHAT EXHIBIT NUMBER THAT IS? THAT PHOTOGRAPH? LIKE ITEM 12 OF 22? YEAH. ITEM. I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. YES. I'M SORRY. UH, THAT WOULD BE, UM, A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE, THE EAST ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS ON PAGE TWO IN OF, OR EXCUSE ME, PAGE 12 OF 22 IN STAFF'S, UH, PACKAGE. THANK YOU. DEBBIE, CAN WE ADD THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT JUST SUBMIT, UH, UPDATED DRAWING TO STAFF JUST PRIOR TO GETTING THAT, UM, STARTING THE CONSTRUCTION? I CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. AYE. MOTION PASSES. OKAY, THANK, THANK YOU. MOVING ON [B31 19-5727 Address/Description: 229 W HOLLYWOOD AVE HDRC Case No.: 2019-426 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: Matt Murray/Pella Windows Request: Window replacement City Council Dist.: 1] TO AGENDA ITEM B 31 H T R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 26. ADDRESS, 2 2 9 WEST HOLLYWOOD AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE FIVE MULTI LIGHT WOOD CASEMENT WINDOWS ON THE FRONT FACADE WITH NEW PELLA ARCHITECT SERIES ALUMINUM CLAD [01:50:01] WOOD WINDOWS TO MATCH SIZE AND CONFIGURATION. AND TWO, REPLACE ALL REMAINING WOOD CASEMENT WINDOWS ON THE SIDE AND REAR FACADES WITH NEW PELLA ARCHITECT SERIES ONE OVER ONE DOUBLE HUNG ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS. ITEMS ONE AND TWO STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT. BASED ON FINDINGS, A THROUGH D STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT REPAIR THE REMAINING EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS IN PLACE. IF THERE ARE ASSEMBLIES THAT ARE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR, THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT EVIDENCE TO THAT EFFECT TO STAFF IN THE FORM OF AN UPDATED WINDOW SCHEDULE AND PHOTOGRAPHS. IF AN ASSEMBLY IS DEEMED DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR BY THE H D R C. BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE NEW WINDOWS MEET THE F FOLLOWING STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLS FULLY WOOD WINDOWS WITH NO CLADDING TO MATCH IT. THE EXISTING CONFIGURATION AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE, ONE OVER ONE WOOD WINDOWS OR, OR ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE STRUCTURE. AND THE CURRENT PROPOSED REPLACEMENT PRODUCT IS NOT APPROPRIATE. MEETING RAILS MUST BE NO TALLER THAN 1.5, 1.25 INCHES IN STYLES NO WIDER THAN 2.25 INCHES. THE FINAL WINDOW SPECIFICATION ALONG WITH THE COMPLETED WINDOW REPLACEMENT WORKSHEET PROVIDED BY O H P STAFF MUST BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. AND I WILL NOTE THAT THERE IS A LETTER FROM THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION IN YOUR PACKET, THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. HELLO, MY NAME IS MATT MURRAY. I REPRESENT KATHY MURRAY AT 2 29 WEST HOLLYWOOD. SIR, CAN YOU ADJUST THE MICROPHONE? THANK YOU. THAT BETTER BRING ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE CONDITION OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS? SO I'VE MET A CONTRACTOR OUT THERE TODAY AND WE JUST TOOK PICTURES. I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO PRINT 'EM 'CAUSE I PICKED UP THE SIGNS. SO MY PLAN IS, I'LL HAVE TO COME HERE ONE MORE TIME, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF EVIDENCE THESE WINDOWS, UH, IF YOU GO TO THE FIRST ONE ON THE LEFT, THE, THE FAR BACK SHOT OF THE WHOLE FRONT, THAT WINDOW RIGHT THERE, THAT WINDOW IS VERY DETERIORATED. THE SUB SILL HAS BEEN REPLACED. IT'S REALLY JUST A TWO BY FOUR AND IT KIND OF HAS A NEGATIVE SLOPE. THESE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN PRETTY BUTCHERED, MOSTLY ON THE SILLS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WE PLAN ON WHEN WE OPEN IT UP, THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF ROT AND STUFF TO REPLACE. BUT THESE WINDOWS, THEY ARE ORIGINAL, BUT THEY ARE AN ODD WINDOW. YOU KNOW, IT'S AN OUTSWING CASEMENT WITH AN INSWING SCREEN. UM, THEY ARE FRENCH CASEMENTS WHERE WHEN YOU OPEN UP, THERE'S NO MIDDLE SECTION. THERE CURRENTLY IS NO WEATHER STRIPPING, WHICH I KNOW IT'S EASIER TO REPLACE THAT. BUT THEN IF YOU LOOK THE THREE WINDOWS ON THE RIGHT SIDE, WHICH THAT'S GONNA BE A FUTURE PROJECT, BUT THOSE ARE JUST ONE BY FOUR BUILD SASHES WITH LATTICE, LITERALLY SILICONED TO THE GLASS LIKE AN S D L. SO, SO THESE WINDOWS ARE KIND OF BIG CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THEM PRETTY CLOSELY. YES. IF YOU WOULD BE WILLING, WILLING PICTURE AONE, YES, I'D LIKE STAFF TO GET A CHANCE TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT THE WINDOWS AS WELL, IF THAT CAN BE ARRANGED BECAUSE THEY, THEY CAN GIVE US ADVICE ON WHAT'S REPAIRABLE AND WHAT'S NOT REPAIRABLE. OKAY. UM, SECOND, SECONDLY, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE WINDOWS THAT ARE PROPOSED HERE. THE ONE OVER ONES. WELL, THAT'S MOSTLY ON THE SIDE ELEVATIONS. IF YOU GO BACK TO THAT PICTURE WITH THE AWNINGS, THE PLAN IS DEFINITELY TO REPLACE THOSE AWNINGS. BUT THE HOMEOWNER DOES LIKE THOSE AWNINGS BECAUSE THE HOUSE DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR, THE WINDOWS ALL KIND OF LINE UP. SO IT IS A NICE PRIVACY FEATURE AND A SUNBLOCK. BUT CURRENTLY CASEMENT WINDOWS, YOU CAN'T EVEN OPEN 'EM WITH THE INCLINE OF THOSE. SO WE ARE DEFINITELY PROPOSING THE DOUBLE HUNGS ON THAT SIDE ELEVATION. BUT WE'RE OPEN IF YOU WANT CASEMENTS, WE CAN DO CASEMENTS. AND WHEN SHE DOES THE AWNINGS, WE CAN JUST MAKE SURE THEY HAVE CLEARANCE. WELL, MAYBE WE SHOULD DEAL WITH STEP ONE AT A TIME. GOT IT. AND I THINK GETTING, GETTING EVIDENCE OF THE, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AN OVERALL PLAN. 'CAUSE THAT MAY KIND OF DICTATE ANYTHING DIFFERENT ON THE FRONT. THAT WAS THE REASON. BUT I DO WANNA SAY TO THE APPLICANT THAT, UM, IF WE DO MOVE WITH, UH, REPLACING BECAUSE OF DETERIORATION, WE WOULD PROBABLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU REPLACE IN-KIND. YES, MA'AM. SO YOU MAY WANNA, YOU KNOW, START CONSIDERING THAT FOR SURE. THAT'S FINE. IT HAS TO BE A CASEMENT, LAUREN. SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO WITHDRAW AND COME BACK? WELL, I'D LIKE TO KNOW, CAN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD? I KNOW THAT WAS, WELL, RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY REPLACING BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO REPLACE THEM. OKAY. BUT I THINK THAT'S, SO DO I NEED TO DO ANYTHING OR ARE YOU GUYS GONNA GO OUT AND TAKE PICTURES? AND ON THE RECORD YOU CAN SAY THAT YOU'RE WITHDRAWING AND IF YOU WOULD, UH, AGREE TO WITHDRAW AND THEN, UH, ARRANGE WITH STAFF TO COME OUT AND INSPECT THE WINDOWS. OKAY. AND THEN COME BACK WITH PHOTOS AND THE STAFF'S REPORT TO SEE, UM, WHETHER THEY CONCUR WITH THE NEED TO REPLACE OR WHETHER THEY FEEL THAT, UH, SOME OR ALL OF THEM COULD BE REPAIRED. OKAY, UNDERSTOOD. SO I WITHDRAW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THERE WAS A LETTER FROM THE MONTE VISTA THAT ARE WE GONNA HEAR THAT TODAY OR SHARE IT WITH YOU? OKAY. MOVING ON TO AGENDA [B32 19-5849 Address/Description: 417 E LOCUST HDRC Case No.: 2019-439 Historic District Name: Tobin Hill Applicant: Marshall Miles/Merkava Investments, LLC Request: Installation of a circular driveway, site modifications, fencing, signage, door replacement City Council Dist.: 1] [01:55:01] ITEM B 32 H T R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 39 ADDRESS, FOUR 17 EAST LOCUST. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ONE, REPLACE FOUR EXISTING MULTI LIGHT WOODEN FRONT DOOR, WOODEN FRONT DOORS WITH NEW DOORS. TWO, MODIFY THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION TO INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF THE CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY IN THE FRONT YARD. INCREASE THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING CURB. CUT, PULL, POUR A FULL SIDE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY IN LIEU OF RIBBONS AND ADD A SECOND CURB. CUT THREE. INSTALL A REAR CONCRETE PARKING PAD TO TOTAL APPROXIMATELY 825 SQUARE FEET OFF OF THE REAR PAVED ALLEY. FOUR. INSTALL A WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE MEASURING OVER EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT. FIVE. INSTALL A WOODEN FREESTANDING SIGN IN THE FRONT YARD TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 2.5 SQUARE FEET AND SIX, RECEIVE HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION. ITEM ONE, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DOOR REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING. B. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE DOORS BE REPAIRED IN PLACE. INSTALLATION OF WOODEN SCREEN DOORS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN OF THE HOME IS ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. IF THE H D R C FINDS THAT ONE OR MORE OF THE DOORS IS DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED OR NOT ORIGINAL TO THE STRUCTURE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT ALL NEW DOORS BE FULLY WOOD AND MATCH THE EXISTING CONFIGURATION, EXISTING LIGHT CONFIGURATION AND DETAILING OF THE EXISTING DOORS. ITEM TWO, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS BASED ON FINDING C. ITEM THREE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REAR HARDSCAPING MODIFICATIONS BASED ON FINDING D. ITEM FOUR. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRIVACY FENCING AS PROPOSED. BASED ON FINDING E STAFF FINDS THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD PROPOSE REAR WOODEN FENCING WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET TO COMPLY WITH THE U D C SECTION 35 DASH FIVE 14, WHICH IS ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. ITEM FIVE, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE AS NOTED IN FINDING F. AND ITEM SIX. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION BASED ON FINDINGS G THROUGH I WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT COMPLIES WITH ALL ADMINISTRATIVE AND H D R C APPROVALS AND INCLUDING THE FINAL DETERMINATION FOR ITEMS ONE THROUGH FIVE ABOVE THE APPLICANT. HERE PLEASE. UM, AND JUST FOR EVERYONE'S KNOWLEDGE, WE DO HAVE A SYSTEM TO BE HEARD, BUT WE ARE GOING TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FIRST AND THEN WE'LL CALL CITIZENS. UH, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS, UH, MARSHALL MILES, UH, 58 24 RAVEN DALE LANE. AND I AM THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER OF FOUR 17 EAST LOCUST STREET. SO REGARDING, UH, ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE DOOR REPLACEMENT. UM, I HAVE, UH, SEVERAL EXAMPLES OF OTHER DOORS IN THE AREA OF PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN FULLY RESTORED. AND SO PART OF MY PROPOSAL WAS TO HAVE A DOOR THAT IS SIMILAR TO OTHER ONES OF OTHER RESTORED PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, THIS WOULD BOTH INCREASE THE BEAUTY OF THE BUILDING ITSELF AND INCREASE THE SAFETY FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. SO HERE ARE TWO EXAMPLES OF 4 0 1 AND 4 0 2 LOCUST TREAT FOR EXAMPLES OF 4 0 6 AND 4 1 5 LOCUST 4 1 5 LOCUST IS THE BUILDING THAT IS ADJACENT TO MINE. UH, MY PROPOSAL WAS THE ONE ON THE RIGHT, THE LIGHT CRAFTSMAN STYLE MAHOGANY WOOD. UH, IT IS SIMILAR TO 5 1 8 PASCAL STREET, WHICH IS, UH, RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM MY PARTICULAR PROPERTY. THIS IS A, UH, CLOSEUP OF WHAT THE DOORS LOOK CURRENTLY. AND THE LAST SLIDE, IF YOU WILL. UH, THIS JUST SHOWS SOME OF THE CURRENT DAMAGE THAT, THAT EXIST FOR THE PARTICULAR, UH, DOORS THAT EXIST RIGHT NOW. CHIP PAINT, UH, ROTTING WOOD WITH POSSIBLE MOLT DAMAGE. UH, AN OLD STEEL MESH BURGLAR PROTECTION, UH, BROKEN PANES IN THE WINDOWS THEMSELVES. UH, THAT IS WHAT I'M DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW. SO I'M JUST ASKING THAT THE BOARD RECONSIDER, UH, THE REPLACEMENT OF THE DOORS TO HAVE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN RESTORED. JUST CONSISTENT WITH THEM. THERE'S NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME. WE CAN HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. QUICK QUESTION. OKAY, SO THERE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE DEALING WITH FOUR DOORS HERE, RIGHT? YES, SIR. YEAH. EACH PARTICULAR UNIT HAS ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL DOOR. YOU'RE GONNA RETAIN ALL FOUR DOORS, CORRECT? YES. I'M NOT MOVING ANY DOORS. JUST WANTED TO CHANGE THE, THE DOOR ITSELF AND, AND HAVE ALL FOUR OF THEM BE IDENTICAL AND AND CONSISTENT IN STRUCTURE. UH, SIMILAR TO GO, GO BACK, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE TO THIS, THE CRAFTSMAN STYLE ONE THAT, THAT'S THE SAME ONE THAT YOU SEE AT 5 1 8 PASCAL. [02:00:04] AND THAT'S ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURE OF THIS CRAFTSMAN STYLE BUILDING. SO AGAIN, STAFF MAY COMMENT ON THE ORIGINALITY OF THOSE DOORS OR WHETHER THIS STRUCTURE WAS MODIFIED TO BECOME A, A QUADRUPLEX AT SOME POINT IN ITS LIFE. SURE. SO THIS HOUSE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE. UM, MOST OF THE HOUSES ON THIS BLOCK OF PAS OR LOCUST ARE, UM, ONE WAY TO THINK ABOUT THE WAY THAT WE'RE INTERPRETING THESE DOORS IS HOW WE INTERPRET WINDOW REPLACEMENT. UM, SO THESE EXISTING WINDOWS YOU CAN SEE, OR DOORS, YOU CAN SEE KIND OF A SIMILAR CONFIGURATION OF WINDOWS ON THE TOP TWO. WE JUST FEEL THAT THESE WINDOWS OR DOORS, SINCE THEY'RE PROMINENTLY VIEWED FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND WOOD ARE ESSENTIALLY CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES OF THIS MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING EITHER RESTORATION OR IF THEY ARE APPROVED FOR REPLACEMENT, THAT THE CONFIGURATION MATCHES WHAT'S EXISTING AND BEYOND THE BROKEN PANS. UH, W WERE YOU ABLE TO ASSESS, UH, THE CONDITION OF THE DOORS OR WHETHER THEY'RE, UH, UH, GOOD CANDIDATES FOR REHABILITATION? NO. IT LOOKS LIKE THE, UH, MAIL SLOTS IN THEM. YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. SO WHAT WOULD BE YOUR PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE, SO YOU PROVIDE A MAIL SLOT IN YOUR PROPOSED DOOR AS WELL? UH, THAT IS MY INTENTION, YES. I MEAN THE INFORMATION THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING, UH, IN THAT IMAGE. AND TODAY, I DON'T FEEL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, SOMETHING THAT IS BEYOND REPAIR. I DON'T KNOW IF THE, UH, APPLICANT WANTS TO COMMENT ON SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS BEFORE WE GO INTO THE CITIZENS. NO, I, YES, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE OTHER ITEMS AS WELL. SO, UH, ITEM TWO, I'M WITHDRAWING MY REQUEST FOR ITEM TWO. UH, ITEM THREE. THANK YOU. UH, ITEM FOUR FOR THE PRIVACY FENCING, I WILL RESUBMIT THAT, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH U D C SECTION 35 5 14. SO IT'LL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT. AND, UH, ITEM FIVE, I'M WITHDRAWING THAT REQUEST AS WELL. SO THE ONLY OUTSTANDING ISSUE IS GONNA BE THE DOOR. YES, SIR. NOW ITEM SIX, DOES THAT EVEN, IT IS STILL AN ITEM, OPEN ITEM. YES. SO ITEM SIX IS HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION. THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF REINVESTMENT THAT THE APPLICANT IS PUTTING INTO THIS PROPERTY THAT ISN'T BEING CONSIDERED BY THE H D R C, EITHER BECAUSE IT'S ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OR CONFINED TO THE INTERIOR. SO WE DO NEED AN ACTION ON ITEM SIX. QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, I KNOW THE APPLICANT HAS EXPRESSED CONCERN FOR SAFETY AND, UH, BROKEN GLASS AND ALL THAT, UM, IF THE DOORS WERE TO BE MAINTAINED, BUT, UM, SINCE OUR PURVIEW IS NOT ON THE INTERIOR OF THE STRUCTURE, IF THE APPLICANT HAD, UH, APPLIED A WOOD PANEL ON THE INSIDE OF THE DOOR SO THAT FROM THE EXTERIOR IT'S STILL ALL GLASS, BUT ON THE INTERIOR THERE IS PAINTED WOOD THAT WOULD PROVIDE SOME, UH, DEGREE OF SAFETY, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT STAFF COULD, UH, COMMENT ON? I MEAN, WE WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT BECAUSE THE EXTERIOR WOULD BE MAIN REMAIN UNINTERRUPTED. UM, WE WOULDN'T NEED TO APPROVE THAT, AS YOU MENTIONED. UM, IN OUR RECOMMENDATION, WE ALSO STATE THAT AN EXTERIOR SCREEN DOOR, UM, THAT HAS SOME SORT OF CRAFTSMAN FEATURES THAT WERE INSTALLED ON THE EXTERIOR TO GET TO SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THE APPLICANT IS EXPRESSING. BUT THE ORIGINAL DOORS WERE MAINTAINED AS IS THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. SO A SCREEN ON THE EXTERIOR WOULD REQUIRE OUR REVIEW, BUT WE WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE A OF A SYMPATHETIC DESIGN OR WE COULD SUPPORT SOMETHING ON THE INTERIOR. AND WE UNPACK THAT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BECAUSE I, I, I WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME GOING FOR SOMETHING THAT ADDRESS, UH, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, UH, CHALLENGES THE AUTHENTICITY OF WHAT THOSE DOORS ARE ABOUT BY PUTTING FALSE PANELS AND THINGS BEHIND THEM. IF I, IS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE VULNERABILITY OF THESE KIND OF DOORS TO BREAK-INS? IS IT YOUR CONCERN THAT THE PEOPLE ON THE INTERIOR FEEL LIKE THEY'RE BEING VIEWED FROM THE STREET? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS MOTIVATING THE DESIRE? BOTH, BOTH OF THOSE ARE CONCERNS. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE, THE BURGLAR MESH IS, IS NOT ORIGINAL. HOWEVER, ONE, UH, SUGGESTION THAT I, THAT I DID PROPOSE TO SOME OF THE CONTRACTORS WORKING ON THIS WAS SIMILAR TO THE ONES THAT YOU HAD MADE. INSTEAD OF HAVING A WOOD BEHIND IT, PUT [02:05:01] AN ADDITIONAL LAYER OF GLASS THAT WOULD BE TINTED AND THEREFORE IT WOULD PREVENT INDIVIDUALS LOOKING IN, TRYING TO PEER INTO THE, INTO THE BUILDING ITSELF AND PROVIDE AN ADDED EDGE OF, OF SAFETY AND SECURITY FOR THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE THERE AS WELL. RIGHT. AND I THINK YOU'LL FIND IF YOU, UH, LOOK IN THE, UH, THE CODES, WHILE THAT'S NOT OUR PURVIEW, YOU'LL DISCOVER THAT THERE'S REQUIREMENTS FOR SAFETY CLASS OR LAMINATED GLASS, UH, FOR, UH, GLAZED DOORS LIKE THIS OR EVEN SIDELIGHTS WITHIN, UH, 24 INCHES TO EITHER SIDE OF THE DOORS. SO INVESTIGATE THAT. IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT MODIFICATIONS OF, OF THE GLAZING MATERIAL ITSELF, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE CITIZEN TO BE HEARD. UM, IF THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A SEAT, UM, WE'LL CALL RICKY KUSHNER TO THE PODIUM. I HOPE YOU'LL BEAR WITH ME. . UH, I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO, UH, SEPARATE A GOOD DEAL OF THE POINTS OF MY STATEMENT, UH, ONE FROM ANOTHER. SO I'M JUST GOING TO GO AHEAD AND, AND MAKE BRIEF COMMENT, UH, ABOUT SEVERAL OF THE POINTS. SOME OF THEM THAT, UH, THE, UH, APPLICANT HAS ALREADY A SEATED TO, I THINK, UM, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE OF TOBIN HILL. I, I'M FREDERICA KUSHNER. I LIVE AT 4 0 5 EAST MYRTLE STREET IN TOBIN HILL. , UH, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE, UH, HAS NOT MET WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT WE HAVE REVIEWED THE EXHIBITS AND DISCUSS THE CASE FOR DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION SIGNAGE AND OTHER MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPERTY AT FOUR 17 EAST. UM, LOCUST, WE COMMEND THE OWNER FOR WORKING TO IMPROVE THE BUILDING AND SURROUNDINGS AND SUPPORT THE REQUEST FOR TAX CERTIFICATION. WE ALSO AGREE THAT PARKING BEHIND THE BUILDING WITH ACCESS FROM THE ALLEY IS IDEAL, ALTHOUGH I'LL HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT WHOEVER PAVED THAT ALLEY WITH SOLID CONCRETE MADE A BIG MISTAKE, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, WATER RUNOFF IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, HOWEVER, WE WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON SEVERAL OF THE OTHER REQUESTS. NUMBER ONE, FRONT DOORS. THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUILT IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD, WHICH HAVE WOODEN FRONT DOORS WITH EIGHT TO 12 GLASS PANES. WE RECOMMEND THAT THE DOORS BE REPLAY, REPAIRED, NOT REPLACED. UH, NUMBER TWO, WITH THE DRIVEWAY RIBBON DRIVEWAYS ARE COMMON IN THE AREA, IN THAT AREA OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY ALLOW RAINWATER TO SOAK INTO THE GROUND RATHER THAN RUN INTO THE STREET. WE HOPE THE NEW DRIVEWAY WILL BE THE SOME VERSION OF A RIBBON DRIVEWAY. UH, THERE ARE CIRCULAR DRIVEWAYS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT THEY WERE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE INITIATION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT IN 2008. WE ARE NOT, THEY ARE NOT CHARACTERISTICS OF TOBIN HILL. WE RECOMMEND THAT ACCESS AND PARKING REMAIN CONFINED TO THE SIDE AND REAR, THEN THERE WILL BE NO NEED TO WIDEN THE CURB. CUT. NUMBER FOUR, FENCING, WHATEVER FENCING IS TO BE INSTALLED SHOULD CONFORM TO SPECIFICATIONS BY THE CITY AND THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES. WE RECOMMEND A SIX FOOT FENCE OR LOWER SET BACK TO THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING FREESTANDING SIGN. THERE ARE SEVERAL MULTI-UNIT BUILDINGS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, HOWEVER, NONE OF THEM HAS PERMANENT FREESTANDING SIGNAGE. WE SEE NO PRECEDENT AND NO NEED FOR A SIGN IN THE FRONT YARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I MOVE, UH, FOR APPROVAL BASED UPON STAFF'S FINDINGS. AND OUR DISCUSSION TODAY FOR ITEM ONE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE EXISTING, UH, HISTORIC DOORS BE RETAINED AND REH, UH, REHABILITATED, AND THAT IF THE OWNER WISHES TO MODIFY THEM FURTHER, UM, AS DISCUSSED, UH, WITH INTERIOR APPLICATIONS THAT THAT BE REVIEWED BY STAFF. SORRY, JUST THAT WOULD BE A DENIAL, NOT AN APPROVAL SAYING I'M APPROVING REHABILITATION OF THOSE DOORS. UH, HE'S ASKING FOR REPLACING RIGHT. ITEM ONE. SO I, WHAT I'M SAYING IS I WOULD APPROVE A REHABILITATION, NOT A, NOT A REPLACEMENT DEMONSTRATION. OKAY. SO TO REPHRASE IT, TO, TO BE CLEAR THEN, A DENIAL OF ITEM ONE WITH A STIPULATION THAT THE DOORS BE RETAINED AND REHABILITATED AND THAT IF THE, UH, APPLICANT WISHES TO MODIFY THEM FURTHER WITH INTERIOR APPLICATIONS. THESE BE REVIEWED BY STAFF, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY STAFF. [02:10:01] THE APPLICANT HAS WITHDRAWN. ITEM TWO, APPROVAL OF ITEM THREE. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT SAID HE WAS WITHDRAWN. YES. WITHDRAWING OF ITEM THREE? NO, NO, NO, NO. I, I, I WAS WITHDRAWING ITEM TWO. SO YOU'RE RETAINING ITEM THREE. YES, SIR. THE HARDSCAPE. OKAY. AND WITH, UM, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS APPROVED, UM, THE RETAINING OF ITEM FOUR, CORRECT. UH, APPROVAL OF ITEM FOUR WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS THAT IT, UH, COMPLY WITH U D C SECTION 35 WITHDRAWAL OF ITEM FIVE BY THE APPLICANT AND APPROVAL OF ITEM SIX WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. UH, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. [B33 19-5824 Address/Description: 467 FURR DR HDRC Case No.: 2019-425 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: Faron Quintero Request: Installation of exterior storm windows City Council Dist.: 7] ITEM B 33 HT R C CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 25. ADDRESS 4 67 FOR DRIVE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL EXTERIOR VINYL STORM WINDOWS OVER THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON BINDS A THROUGH B WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION THAT THE WINDOWS BE FULLY WOOD AND LIEU IN LIEU OF THE PROPOSED VINYL AND FEATURE A TIN THAT CLOSELY MATCHES THOSE USED HISTORICALLY IN THE DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT AN UPDATED PRODUCT SPECIFICATION TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR, PRIOR TO RECEIVING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. I'M FAREN QUINTERO AND I'M THE OWNER AT 4 6 7 FUR DRIVE. I'M PETITIONING, UH, TO BE ABLE TO INSTALL VINYL STORM WINDOWS, UM, IN MY, IN MY HOME. UM, I KNOW THAT, UM, WITHIN A TWO BLOCK RADIUS ON MY SAME STREET, THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THE STORM WINDOWS THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. THIS IS ALSO 3 4, 2 4. THIS IS ON THAT SAME BLOCK ON THE 300 BLOCK. I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT THE ADDRESS IS. I DON'T REMEMBER OFFHAND, SORRY. 3 5, 0 4. AND, UH, MY HOME WAS BUILT IN 1946. SO IT'S A POSTWAR RANCH. UH, SOME OF THESE HOMES, UM, PREDATE MY, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION OF MY HOME. AND, UH, AS YOU CAN SEE IN MY OPINION, AND I HOPE YOU'LL CONCUR WITH ME, THAT INSTALLING OF THE, UH, STORM WINDOWS OVERLAID OVER THE EXISTING, UH, WOODEN WINDOWS DOES NOT DETRACT FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURES. 4, 5 0 4. AND, UH, AS FAR AS ARCHITECTURAL HOMOGENEITY, THIS IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE WITH, UH, STORM WINDOWS OVERLAID ON THE BOTTOM HALF, BUT YET NOTHING, UH, BEING CONSISTENT ON THE TOP HALF. SINCE I SUBMITTED MY APPLICATION, I'VE ALSO, UM, GONE TO NEIGHBORING STREETS IN MONTICELLO PARK, AND I FOUND OTHER EXAMPLES OF, UM, WINDOWS THAT WERE ACTUALLY REPLACED VERSUS I'M PETITIONING TO KEEP MY EXISTING WINDOWS AND SIMPLY INSTALL THE VINYL WINDOWS OVER I MAY 3 6 2 NORTH. UH, AGAIN, IT PREDATES, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION OF MY HOME, 1940, AND I'M BASING THIS ON BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT. UM, INFORMATION 3 5 7 NORTH. THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 1940. THE TOP EXAMPLE 3 0 7 QUENTIN BUILT IN 1947 IS, UM, ALMOST IN SYNC WITH THE YEAR MINE WAS BUILT VERSUS HOWEVER, HERE THEY HAVE ACTUALLY REPLACED THEIR WINDOWS. THEIR FACADE ACTUALLY ALMOST MIMICS, UM, MY HOME 3, 5 9. QUENTIN, AGAIN, BUILT IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD, 1949, AND THEY HAVE REPLACED THEIR WINDOWS VERSUS I'M ONLY PETITIONING TO, UM, INSTALL 'EM OVER THE EXISTING ONES. [02:15:10] WELL, AS YOU'VE PROBABLY SURMISED THAT WINDOWS ARE, UH, FROM OTHER DISCUSSIONS HERE. WINDOWS ARE CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES OF A HOME. AND, UH, GUIDELINES FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS ARE GENERALLY, UH, REPLACE IN KIND, UH, VINYL NOT APPROVED OR, UH, PLACEMENTS TO REPLACE IN KIND, UH, WHICH WOULD BE WOOD IN YOUR CASE, BUT I'M NOT, I'M NOT ASKING TO REPLACE. CORRECT. I'M JUST GONNA CLARIFY HERE. SO, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO RETAIN THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS. HIS REQUEST IS TO INSTALL VINYL STORM WINDOWS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE HOUSE. THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS SIMPLY THE MATERIAL OF THEIR, THOSE STORM WINDOWS. SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THEY BE MADE OF WOOD. HE'S REQUESTING THAT THEY BE MADE OF VINYL. I, I'M REQUESTING THAT IF, IF WOOD IS PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY PURPOSES, THAT I'D BE GIVEN OP ALSO THE OPTION OF EITHER WOOD OR VINYL. I MEAN, UM, COMMENT ON THIS AND IT'S NOT GONNA BE WHITE. AND RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE WHITE WOOD SCREENS OVER YOUR WINDOW. SO YOU'LL BE REMOVING THOSE WOOD SCREENS. YES. AND INSTALLING THE WINDOW, THE WHITE VI THE VINYL I'M GIVING THAT, ARE THERE GONNA BE WHITE? YES. BECAUSE IT SAYS YEAH, TO MATCH THE, UH, THE UH, YES. TO MATCH THE TRUNK. IT SAYS CHARCOAL ON YOUR QUOTE. CHARCOAL. NO. OH, THAT'S A SCREEN. OKAY. THERE ARE OTHER WINDOWS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, UH, I THINK THEY'VE GONE WITH ALMOST A, A TOP OR A BEIGE COLOR. AND THEN THERE'S SOME THAT ARE ACTUALLY THE BRONZE COLOR ALUMINUM. I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU, PLEASE. WHAT'S THE, THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF, OF ADDING THE STORM WINDOWS? YOU SAID ENERGY EFFICIENCY. ENERGY EFFICIENCY. AND THERE'S ALSO A SAFETY ISSUE. UM, DURING THE RECENT STORM, UH, WHEN WE HAD THE HIGH WINDS, I ACTUALLY HAD A PANE OF GLASS FLOW LIKE CRACK INTO MY LIVING ROOM. AND SO, AND IT WAS RIGHT WHERE THE DOG'S BOWL WAS, OR, YOU KNOW, OR YEAH, IT, RIGHT WHERE MY DOG WOULD BE , YOU KNOW, SO IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE AS WELL AS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THERE'S NO REINFORCEMENT TO THE OLD PANES, THE, THE OLD WINDOW PANES. UM, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE OFTEN MAKE IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS IS THE INTERIOR APPLICATION OF THE STORM WINDOWS. MM-HMM. , IN WHICH CASE I DON'T THINK WE WOULD PARTICULARLY CARE ABOUT THE MATERIAL, YOU KNOW? MM-HMM. , WE'RE INTERESTED IN, UM, THE SHADOW LINES, THE MATERIAL THAT EXIST IN THE HISTORIC WINDOWS. IS THAT ANYTHING YOU, IF YOU LOOKED AT INTERIOR STORM WINDOWS INSTEAD OF EXTERIOR STORM WINDOWS? I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THEM, BUT LIVING WITH THEM DAY TO DAY, UM, I'M NOT, SO I'M NOT SURE IT'S SOMETHING I WOULD HAVE TO DO. I, I WOULD WANT TO DO, BUT I WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE THE SCREENS ON THE OUTSIDE AS WELL AS THE EXISTING WINDOWS. AND THEN YOU'RE SAYING ANOTHER LAYER ON THE INSIDE THAT THAT IS MORE TYPICAL HOW YOU RETROFIT HISTORIC WINDOWS SO THAT THE EXTERIOR APPEARANCE REMAINS, UH, AS, AS CLOSE TO ITS ORIGINAL. BECAUSE IF YOU DO AN EXTERIOR STORM PANEL, THEN THAT MEANS IT'S ONE GLAZING PANEL THAT THEN IN CASES THE ENTIRE, UH, IN THIS CASE, UH, DOUBLE HUNG OR SINGLE HUNG WINDOW. AND THAT HAS A PRETTY DRAMATIC EFFECT OF, OF THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE WINDOW FROM THE EXTERIOR. SO THIS IS REALLY, I THINK ONE OF THE FIRST TIMES I'VE SEEN SOMEONE COME AND SAY, HEY, I WANNA PUT, UM, A, A STORM WINDOW ON THE OUTSIDE OF MY HISTORIC WINDOW. USUALLY PEOPLE APPROACH THAT FROM THE INTERIOR AND THAT REDUCES DRAFTS AND IT WOULD HAVE THE SAME SAFETY BENEFITS SO THAT IF SOMETHING DOES PUNCH A HOLE IN THE GLASS OUTSIDE, IT'S NOT GONNA FLY INSIDE 'CAUSE IT'S GONNA HIT YOUR INTERIOR STORM WINDOW. AND AS MY COMMISSIONER, A FELLOW COMMISSIONER SAYS, THEN IT BECOMES KIND OF A NON-ISSUE TO US BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T REALLY AFFECTED THE, THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE EXTERIOR OF THE HOUSE THAT WAY. I THINK WE'RE ALSO CONFUSING THE PICTURES THAT YOU'RE USING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY'RE NOT, UH, MESH, THEY'RE NOT A MATCH TO, THEY'RE NOT A MESH. LIKE THEY DON'T HAVE, AM I NOT MISUNDERSTANDING THAT? YOU, YOU WANT THE VINYL FRAME AND THEN YOU WANT A SCREEN, LIKE A MESH SCREEN ON IT? IT'S AN ACTUAL, IT WOULD BE AN ACTUAL DOUBLE PANE OR ACTUAL DOUBLE, NOT DOUBLE PANE WINDOW, BUT IT WOULD BE A CONSTRUCTION OF IT. IT WOULD BE A PANE ON TOP AND A PANE ON THE BOTTOM. AND THERE WOULD BE A, OH, IT'S A GLASS SCREEN. IT'S, IT IS A GLASS PANE FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY PURPOSES. THEY WOULD STILL BE, UH, FUNCTIONAL TO WHERE I COULD OPEN THEM. AND, BUT YOU'RE REMOVING THEM FROM THE OUTSIDE? IT REALLY DOES. I MEAN, I, I I THINK YOU'RE COMPELLING A CASE THAT THERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT [02:20:01] I THINK FOR YOUR SAKE, I THINK YOU SHOULD MAYBE CONSIDER THE INSIDE RATHER THAN THE OUTSIDE. THE FACT THAT YOU CAN CONTROL, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN OPEN, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO OUTSIDE AND REMOVE THE SCREEN OR THE STORM WINDOW TO BE ABLE TO GET AIR INTO YOUR HOUSE SO YOU CAN OPEN THEM. DON'T BELIEVE. SO I THINK THERE YOU CAN'T, I THINK YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO, IT SLIDES OPEN. SO YOU WOULD, FROM THE INSIDE, YOU WOULD OPEN YOUR EXISTING WINDOW AND THEN YOU WOULD OPEN THE STORM WINDOW. THEN I WOULD BE ABLE TO OPEN THE, THE STORM WINDOWS AND, AND THERE WOULD BE A SCREEN. YES. NO, MY QUESTION IS WOULDN'T BE A DRAWBRIDGE. YEAH. IF THIS PHOTO HERE, UH, THE BACK, THE WINDOW ON THE RIGHT, I MEAN THE LEFT HAS A SCREEN ON IT MM-HMM. , UH, WHICH I ASSUME YOU'D TAKE OFF. AND THEN IN THE WINDOW NEXT TO THAT, UH, DOES NOT HAVE A SCREEN. NO. AND, UH, I'M JUST WONDERING IN YOUR PROPOSAL, UH, HOW A NEW WINDOW ON THE OUTSIDE OF THIS WINDOW, WHETHER THE DEPTH OF THAT JAM WOULD EVEN ACCOMMODATE ANOTHER, UH, STORM WINDOW ON THE OUTSIDE. WELL, THE WAY THEY'RE CONSTRUCTED, UM, I THINK THEY'D PROBABLY BE ABOUT THE SAME THICKNESS. IT'S A PRETTY DEEP, IT'S A PRETTY DEEP OPENING, A PRETTY DEEP JAM IN THERE THE WAY IT'S CONSTRUCTED. AND ARE YOUR PROPOSED WIN, UH, WINDOWS, UH, FULL HEIGHT SCREENS OR JUST HALF SCREENS? HALF SCREENS. I COULD GO WITH FULL SCREENS. I MEAN, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL APPROVE, BUT I CAN'T OPEN THE TOP, THE TOP HALF OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS. ANYWAY. I HAVE ONE QUESTION, JUST TO BE CLEAR. AS, UH, YOU WERE ASKING THIS, THIS FIRST WINDOW ON THE LEFT THAT ALREADY HAS A SCREEN ON IT, THAT, THAT DOES HAVE A SCREEN. SO THE INSTALLATION OF THE NEW ONE WOULD ASK TO REPLACE THIS SCREEN, THOSE SCREENS? YES. AND IF YOU'LL, IF YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE WINDOW TO THE RIGHT, UM, THAT'S ONLY TWO PANES, BUT THERE ARE FOUR PANELS TO THE SCREENS. SO THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S NO CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE EITHER. AS FAR AS THE SCREENS, SOME ARE TWO PANELS, SOME ARE FOUR PANEL, NO SCREEN BACK THERE. I SEE A LOT OF EXAMPLES OF THESE WINDOWS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT HAS STAFF DONE FOR THAT? HAS, HAS IT BEEN, HAVE THOSE, HAVE THOSE BEEN APPROVED OR JUST WE HONESTLY DON'T GET THESE REQUESTS THAT MUCH. I KNOW STORM WINDOWS ARE NOT AS COMMON HERE. UM, THEY'RE MORE OF A SEASONAL THING. AND SO IT'S NOT INTENDED USUALLY THAT THEY'RE SUPER OPERABLE. YOU PUT THEM ON, WE NEED THEM AND TAKE THEM OFF AT THE END OF THE SEASON. UM, THE GUIDELINES DO RECOMMEND THAT, UM, THEY BE APPROACHED IN THE SAME WAY THAT A, A HISTORIC WOOD SCREEN BE APPROACHED. AND SO, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF SCREEN MATERIAL, YOU MIGHT HAVE THE GLAZING MATERIAL FOR THE STORM WINDOW. AND SO THAT'S WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS. AND YOU PLAN ON HAVING THESE ON ALL YEAR LONG, OR THE EXISTING WOODEN WINDOWS ARE PRETTY ENERGY EFFICIENT IN INEFFICIENT. YES. SO IT'S, IT CAN, THERE'S A, THERE'S A MARKET, THERE'S A VERY, VERY OBVIOUS TEMPERATURE CHANGE EVEN WITHIN THE LIVING ROOM FROM ON THE WEST SIDE. UH, I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROBABLY FIVE FEET FROM THE SOFA TO THE WINDOWS. YEAH, IT'S, IT'S, AND I THINK IT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TOWARD, UM, ENERGY EFFICIENCY. WELL, I'M GONNA JUMP IN HERE. I'LL TELL YOU WHERE I AM. THE MATERIAL REMAINS IMPORTANT. I CAN SUPPORT STAFF FINDINGS OR I CAN ALSO SUPPORT INTERIORS. I DON'T THINK NEED TO COME BEFORE THIS. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. UH, I, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO INTERIOR STORM WINDOWS HAVE TO BE APPROVED HERE. NO, JUST LIKE THE CASE WITH THE DOORS, ANY SORT OF INTERIOR INTERVENTION WOULDN'T REQUIRE A C O A I JUST, UH, WANNA SAY, SORRY. I MEAN, UM, HE'S, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS, I MEAN, SOMETIMES WE DO LOOK WHAT'S, WHAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY EXAMPLES OF IT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND, UM, IT'S NOT GONNA BE SOMETHING IT'S, IT'S REVERSIBLE. IT'S NOT PERMANENT. UM, EXACTLY. [02:25:01] YEAH, I SEE. YES, EXACTLY. IT WOULD, IT'S NOT PERMANENT. WELL, ACCORDING TO YOUR, UH, APPLICATION PACKET, YOU HAVE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ON YOUR STREET, MAYBE ONE BLOCK DOWN WITHIN A ONE BLOCK RADIUS. BOTH ON, BOTH ON BOTH BLOCKS OF MY, OF MY, MY BLOCK AND THEN, UH, TWO STREET AND NEIGHBORING STREETS AS WELL. BUT AGAIN, ON THE NEIGHBORING STREETS, I FOUND THAT THEY ACTUALLY REPLACED THE WINDOWS WITH VINYL WINDOWS. YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY A LOT OF THOSE THAT ARE BEING, UH, HELD AS AN EXAMPLE HERE ARE ACTUALLY REPLACEMENTS. THEY, THEY'RE WHOLESALE REPLACEMENTS THAT AREN'T KEEPING WITH THE GUIDELINES AND THAT DOESN'T REALLY SUPPORT YOUR CASE. YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE NOT, UH, COMPLIED NO. WITH THE ONES ON FUR DUE RESPECT, THEN HOW DID THEY GET APPROVED? WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THEY JUST GET TO GO THEM OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND DO THEM, OR THEY MAY PRE PREDATE, UH, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, SO ON 3 42 FUR DRIVE, I WASN'T SAYING ALL THE CASES. I WAS SAYING A LOT OF THE CASES THAT HE'S SHOWING APPEAR TO BE WHOLESALE VINYL WINDOW REPLACEMENTS, NOT THE KIND OF STORE WINDOW SYSTEM. NO. SO THE, THE ONES THAT I'M, I'M, THAT THE APPLICANT IS PRESENTING ARE ON HIS BLOCK, ON HER, ON MY STREET. I FOUND EIGHT EXAMPLES WITHIN A ONE BLOCK, WHICH ARE NOT WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF WINDOWS. IT'S ACTUALLY THE SAME STORM WINDOWS THAT HE'S TRYING TO AM I CAN STAFF CLARIFY THAT. HAVE THEY BEEN OUT THERE? SO YES, THE A THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED EVIDENCE THAT THERE'S EXISTING CONDITIONS OF WHAT HE IS REQUESTING IN THE AREA. WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING IS BASED ON THE GUIDELINES. THESE MAY HAVE BEEN INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE INITIATION OF THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT OR WITHOUT APPROVAL. AND I DO AGREE, BUT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, THESE HAVEN'T BEEN APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION IN A LONG TIME. I'M JUST TRYING TO HELP THE APPLICANT. SO I, I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT'S, UH, HIS ARGUMENT AND I UNDERSTAND SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S CONCERNS. I JUST CAN'T, UM, I CAN'T SUPPORT A VINYL PRODUCT. UH, I I'LL SAY PERIOD. DID YOU SAY YOU CAN'T SUPPORT A VINYL? I CANNOT SUPPORT A VINYL OH, VINYL PRODUCT. SO I WOULD SUPPORT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. OR I WOULD SUPPORT AN INTERIOR PRODUCT, WHICH COULD BE VINYL. OKAY. UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WOULD FALL OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW AND THAT'S PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE. SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION. WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS HERE. UM, I'M GOING TO MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATION SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN A PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER [B34 19-5723 Address/Description: 648 LEIGH ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-322 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: JENNIFER BARRAR/BOBO CUSTOM BUILDERS Request: Window replacement City Council Dist.: 1] 34 HT R C CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 3 22 ADDRESS FOR 6 4 8 LAY STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE 17 1 0 1 WOOD WINDOWS WITH NEW WOOD WINDOWS. THE APPLICANT PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO REPAIR ALL THE WINDOWS AT THE JUNE 20TH, 2019 H D R C HEARING, BUT HAS PROVIDED NEW EVIDENCE IN AN EFFORT TO SUBSTANTIATE THE NEED FOR FULL REPLACEMENT STAFF. DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WOOD REPLACEMENT BASED ON WOOD WINDOW REPLACEMENT. BASED ON FINDINGS, A THROUGH E STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT REPAIR THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS IN PLACE. IF THERE ARE ASSEMBLIES THAT ARE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR, THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE TO THAT EFFECT TO STAFF IN THE FORM OF AN UPDATED WINDOW SCHEDULE AND PHOTOGRAPHS. IF AN ASSEMBLY IS DEEMED DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE NEW WINDOWS MEET THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLS FULLY ONE OVER ONE FULLY WOOD WINDOWS TO MATCH THE EXISTING CONFIGURATION AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE. AND MEET STAFF STANDARD WINDOW STIPULATIONS AS LISTED AT THIS TIME, THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT WINDOWS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE STIPULATIONS. WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, MY NAME IS JENNIFER BARRAR. I AM, UH, REPRESENTING THE HOMEOWNER AT 6 48 LEE STREET. UM, WE WERE MOVING FORWARD WITH REPAIR OF THE WINDOWS PER OUR LAST MEETING. UM, HOWEVER, WE HAD EXPERTS THAT, UH, DEAL WITH, UH, WINDOW REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT COME OUT TO TAKE A LOOK TO START GETTING ESTIMATES ON WHAT THAT WOULD REQUIRE. AND WE WERE TOLD THAT, UM, IT WOULD NOT BE REASONABLE TO REPAIR THE WINDOWS. IT WOULD BE MORE ECONOMICAL TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS, UM, DUE TO DETERIORATION, WEAR TEAR. UM, THE, THE LIST JUST STARTED GOING ON AND ON. UM, SO THAT IS WHEN WE CAME [02:30:01] BACK TO, UH, RESUBMIT FOR REPLACEMENT WITH, UH, WITH MATCHING WINDOWS WITH WOOD WHENEVER ONE, UM, TO MEET, MEET ALL THE CRITERIA TO, UM, MAKE IT. WE, WE DON'T WANNA ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE HOME. WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE. WE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE HAVE BEEN CHANGES MADE OVER TIME. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO, UH, TAKE AWAY FROM THAT. WE JUST, WE'RE TRYING TO MEET THE HOMEOWNER'S REQUEST TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS, HAVE SOMETHING FUNCTIONING AND, AND, UM, THEY'RE GETTING A NEW, UH, CENTRAL AIR AND THEY'RE WANTING TO MAKE THE HOME, UM, MORE ECONOMICAL. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE BACK TO, UH, REPLACEMENT OF WINDOWS. COULD YOU WALK US THROUGH THE WINDOWS ONE BY ONE? IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, ON THE P D F, IT'S SHEET 17, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THEY START. UM, WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU LOOKING FOR? JUST, JUST POINT OUT TO, I SEE THERE'S, THERE'S LIKE A WINDOW SCHEDULE. I CAN'T EVEN TELL HOW MANY PAGES IT IS, BUT IT'S SHOWING EVIDENCE OF WOOD ROT OR DETERIORATION. UM, 'CAUSE THIS IS NEW EVIDENCE. WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS LAST TIME, RIGHT? CORRECT. UH, YES. WE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING THAT IT IS MEANT TO PROVE THAT THE WINDOWS ARE BEYOND REPAIR AND NEED REPLACING REASONABLE REPAIR? YES. UM, UNFORTUNATELY, WE, WE DID NOT TAKE A LOT OF THE, UH, THE LOUVERS OFF OF THE WINDOWS. BUT FROM WHAT WE COULD OBSERVE WITHOUT REMOVING THOSE LOUVERS, UH, WAS THAT THERE THERE IS A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF DETERIORATION, UM, MATCHED WITH A LOT OF CAULKING AND, UH, PAINT TO TRY TO REPAIR WHERE DETERIORATION HAS OCCURRED. UM, THERE IS WATER PENETRATION THAT HAS JUST GROWN OVER TIME BETWEEN THE EXTERIOR AND THE INTERIOR OF THE HOME. UM, AND IT'S JUST, IT'S CONSISTENT FROM WINDOW TO WINDOW. UH, THEY'RE ALL ABOUT EQUAL IN THE AMOUNT OF DETERIORATION FROM THE WINDOWS WE COULD OBSERVE THAT, UH, DID NOT HAVE THE LOUVRES. SO THE, THE LOUVERS WEREN'T REMOVED. BUT YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT THE MATERIAL IS IN THE SIMILAR SHAPE THAT YOU'RE PROVIDED EVIDENCE FOR HERE? YES. BASED ON, UM, HOW THE WINDOWS APPEAR ON THE INTERIOR, WHICH UNFORTUNATELY WE DO NOT HAVE, UH, PHOTOS FOR THOSE. QUESTION FOR STAFF, HAVE Y'ALL HAD A CHANCE TO GO OUT THERE AND LOOK AT THE WINDOWS THAT ARE WE CAN SEE NO. UM, BUT FROM THIS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION COUPLED WITH THE INTERIOR SHOTS FROM THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, WHICH ARE INCLUDED, UM, A LOT OF THE REPAIR OR THE DETERIORATION THAT'S CITED IS CONCENTRATED ON THE SILLS OR THE FRAME, WHICH CAN BE REPLACED ADMINISTRATIVELY. UM, WE DIDN'T FIND ANY COMPELLING EVIDENCE THAT THE ACTUAL SASHES THEMSELVES WERE UNREPAIRABLE MAY SEE LIKE ONE OR TWO EXAMPLES IN SOME OF THESE, LIKE ITEM, I THINK NUMBER FIVE AND NUMBER SIX. BUT I DO AGREE WITH STAFF. I THINK THAT BASED ON THESE PICTURES, A LOT OF IT IS ACTUALLY ON THE FRAME OF THE LOUVRES THEMSELVES. UH, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT EVEN TO THE WINDOW. I WILL SAY, WHEN WE TOOK THE EXPERTS OUT AND ASKED THEM TO GIVE APPRAISAL OF THE WINDOWS, WE ASKED THEM TO ONLY FOCUS ON THE WINDOW COMPONENTS THEMSELVES, NOT THE SASS, SASS, JUST THE SILLS, ANY OF THAT. BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND, UH, THAT IT IS, UH, PREVALENT. YOU CAN SEE THAT IMMEDIATELY. UH, WE WANTED TO FOCUS BASED OFF OF THE COMMENTS FROM LAST TIME TO BE FOCUSED SOLELY ON THE WINDOWS SO WE COULD GET THAT ESTIMATE. AND THAT WAS WHEN WE WERE TOLD, UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY DIDN'T EVEN WANT TO WRITE UP AN ESTIMATE FOR. THEY FELT LIKE THE DAMAGE WAS TOO EXTENSIVE AND, UM, UH, THEY BASICALLY SAID THEY DIDN'T WANNA TAKE THE JOB. I HAVE A HARD TIME FROM THE PICTURES, ESPECIALLY ON THE INSIDE AND, AND THOSE THAT HAVE THE LOOSE TO FIND, YOU KNOW, UNREPAIRABLE CONDITION, I WOULD BE OPEN TO MAYBE STAFF IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO INVITE THEM TO GO INSIDE AND MAYBE REPORT BACK TO US. WELL, GIVEN, GIVEN THIS IS KIND OF THE SECOND TIME THAT THIS COME UP, THIS MIGHT, THIS MIGHT BE WHERE THE D R C, JUST SO THAT THERE'S, IT'S CLEAR TO ME. I APOLOGIZE FOR THE MICROPHONE. IT'S GOING IN AND OUT. IT, IT'S CLEAR TO ME THAT THERE'S PROBABLY SOME AREAS OF SIGNIFICANT DECAY AND THERE MIGHT, THERE MIGHT BE SOME MIDDLE GROUND HERE WHERE A, A CERTAIN GROUP OF THEM MAY REALLY REQUIRE REPLACING AND THE PHOTOGRAPHS JUST AREN'T QUITE GETTING ME THERE. RIGHT. TO SUPPORT. WHY DON'T WE DO THIS? THAT STAFF COMES OUT AND YOU CAN ACTUALLY DO A MORE CLEAR REPORT, OKAY. UH, WITH ALSO STAFF COMMENTS AND THEN COME TO A DEAR, SEE IF YOU WANT, WHERE WE ACTUALLY HAVE IDENTIFIED EACH WINDOW IN WHAT, YOU KNOW, UNREPAIRABLE CONDITION. 'CAUSE I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER FISH IS SAYING IS, I DON'T THINK WE'RE RIGHT HERE. WE'RE NOT AT A POINT WHERE WE'RE GONNA APPROVE ALL OF THEM TO BE REPLACED, BUT WE MAY BE OPEN TO SEE IF SOME OF THEM CAN BE REPLACED. AND, AND USUALLY WE WON'T SAY LIKE, YOU KNOW, OUT OF TWO WINDOWS IN THE FRONT, WE'RE ONLY ONE OF THEM, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL LOOK AT IT AS A, ALSO AS A [02:35:01] WHOLE APPLICATION, THE WHOLE HOUSE. I WONDER IF WHEN WE DO THAT, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THOSE LOUVERS OFF SO YOU CAN HAVE A, A THOROUGH AND COMPLETE, YOU KNOW, EVALUATION RATHER THAN HAVE IT BE ANECDOTAL FROM ONE WINDOW TO ANOTHER, OR ONE SILL TO ANOTHER. YEAH, WE WILL WORK TO, UH, SEE IF WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN. SO I MOVE THAT THIS BE REFERRED TO A DESIGN REVIEW, UH, COMMITTEE SITE VISIT FOR FURTHER EVALUATION. MOTION A SECOND TO SEND THIS TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. A AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. [B35 19-5873 Address/Description: 831 BURLESON ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-362 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Dianet Lopez Daniel Request: Fenestration modifications, porch addition, driveway installation, demolition of a rear accessory structure City Council Dist.: 2] A AGENDA ITEM NUMBER B 35, CASE NUMBER 20 19 360 2 AT 8 31 BURLESON, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE ON THE FRONT FACADE, EXTEND THE FRONT PORCH INCLUDING A ROOF ADDITION, CREATING A FULL WIDTH PORCH. TWO ON THE EAST SIDE FACADE. REPLACE TWO NON-ORIGINAL SIDE DOORS AND WINDOWS WITH TWO NEW WOOD WINDOWS. THREE ON THE EAST SIDE FACADE. INSTALL A HORIZONTAL WINDOW FOR AN INTERIOR BATHROOM. FOUR ON THE WEST SIDE FACADE. REPLACE OR REMOVE AN EXISTING SQUARE WINDOW FOR AN INTERIOR KITCHEN DESIGN. SIX IN, UH, ON THE WEST SIDE ELEVATION. REMOVE THREE WINDOWS AND DOORS TO INSTALL A NEW SIDE DOOR. SEVEN, INSTALL A SIX OR INSTALL A 10 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY. AND EIGHT DEMOLITION OF A REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. DAF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEMS. ONE, POOR TRADITION. THREE HORIZONTAL WINDOW INSTALLATION AND SIX THREE WINDOW REMOVAL BASED ON FINDING C, D, AND G STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEMS 2, 4, 5, 7, AND EIGHT BASED ON FINDINGS B THROUGH M WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. ALL WINDOWS SHOULD BE WOOD SLASH WINDOWS THAT MATCH THE EXISTING WINDOWS IN TERMS OF SIZE, TYPE CONFIGURATION, MATERIAL FORM AND APPEARANCE AND DETAIL AND FEATURE THE STANDARD STIPULATIONS THAT ALL SIDING INFILL SHOULD BE FEATHERED AND PAINTED TO MATCH THAT THE NEW DRIVEWAY SHOULD BE LOCATED AT THE EXISTING APRON ON MUNCIE FEATURED CRUSHED GRANITE OR POURED CONCRETE AND BE NO WIDER THAN 10 FEET. AND THAT EVERY EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO SALVAGE MATERIALS FROM THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. HI, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS AMAD MARTINEZ AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF 8 31 BURLESON. AND, UM, UH, AND, AND, UM, NUMBER ONE ON THE, ON THE PORCH. UM, WE TALKED TO, UH, THE FRAMER. UM, IT HAS TO BE, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE REMOVED, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND IT BECAUSE IN ADDITION, THERE WAS MADE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BUILDING. UH, I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE PERMITS AND IT'S, THAT ONE IS NOT DONE THE RIGHT WAY. UH, WE GOT A PERMIT FOR DEMOLITION AND INTERIOR AND, UH, THE TRACTORS IS FOUR FOOT APART, YOU KNOW, 40, 48 INCHES, THE STUDS. SO WE WILL HAVE TO DEMOLISH THAT TO MAKE IT, REFRAME IT EXACTLY THE SAME WAY IT IS, BUT ON, YOU KNOW, ON THE RIGHT WAY OF BUILDING IT. AND WE WILL RESTORE THE SIDING. SO WE WERE SUGGESTING AND REQUESTING TO EXTEND THE PORCH ALL THE WAY FROM WHERE IT IS RIGHT NOW, FROM ONE OF THE, THE LEFT WINDOW ALL THE WAY TO THAT CORNER AND CREATE A WOOD PORCH WITH RAILING. UM, ALSO BECAUSE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE, WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, IT HAS NO SLOPE ON THE ROOF. AND WE WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE THE PITCH SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW, FLAT ROOF. AND WE CAN USE THE SAME SHINGLES AS THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE HOUSE TO MAKE THE HOUSE LOOK, UH, BETTER APPEALING, YOU KNOW, TO, UM, ON THE ROOF SIDE. AND ALSO REMOVE THE PITCH A LITTLE BIT, ADJUST THE PITCH OF THAT CORNER SO WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE LINE ON THAT CORNER ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BUILDING. WE WOULD LIKE TO RAISE THE PITCH A LITTLE BIT AND ACCOMMODATE IT TO MAKE IT LOOK, MAKE THE HOUSE LOOK MORE, UM, ACCORDING TO THE ACTUAL PITCH THAT WE HAVE. THAT'S ON THE NUMBER ONE, UH, ITEM. NOW, IF I WANT TO GO TO NUMBER THREE, UH, WE HAVE A DESIGN THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE. THIS HOUSE WAS, UM, IT IS A, UM, CONVERT INTO A TRIPLEX. SO WE HAVE SO MANY DOORS RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE SIX DOORS THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE HOUSE, AND WE WANNA [02:40:01] REMOVE SOME OF THEM AND RELOCATE SOME OTHER ONES BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THAT HOUSE WAS REMODELED TO ACCOMMODATE THE, THAT TRIPLEX. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE ASKING TO REMOVE AND, AND RELOCATE THAT THOSE WINDOWS AND THE DOOR, WE WILL NOT REMOVE THE DOOR. WE ACTUALLY, IN THE FRONT, WE HAVE TWO DOORS. I, WE BELIEVE THEY'RE ORIGINAL AND WE'RE THINKING TO MOVE, KEEP ONE ON THE FRONT AND JUST REMOVE ONE TO THE SIDE WHERE WE WOULD LIKE TO RELOCATE THE OTHER ONE. NOW ON THE NUMBER SIX, WE ON THE THREE WINDOWS, WELL THAT WAS THE DOOR IN THE THREE WINDOWS, WE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO RELOCATE 'EM BECAUSE THEY'RE ON THE, ON THE DESIGN WE HAVE FOR THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE. THEY'RE ACTUALLY ON THE WAY, WHICH WILL BE THE MASTER BEDROOM RIGHT THERE. SO I DON'T THINK WE HAVE USED FOR 'EM. THEY'RE COVER AND THEY'RE REALLY BAD. UH, THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE HOUSE WE USING THE WOOD WINDOWS, ALL WOODEN WINDOWS WITH THE SAME LIKE ORIGINALS. SO WE TRYING TO KEEP AND RESTORE THE HOUSE TO THE ORIGINAL WAY THAT IT USED TO BE BUILT. THAT IS THE WINDOW, THE DOOR THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE. THAT'S HOW IT WILL BE. AFTER IT IS DONE, WE WILL PUT IN NEW SIDING ACCORDING TO THE SIDING WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. SO EVERYTHING WILL BE RECITED TO LIKE ORIGINAL, UM, OR TRY TO MATCH IT AS BEST POSSIBLE STAFF CAN CLARIFY. STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF ALL EFFORTS TO RETURN THE SINGLE STORY OR SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE BACK TO ITS SINGLE FAMILY FOOTPRINT. UH, THERE'S SOME, UH, ITEMS THAT ARE DISCREPANT TO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, INCLUDING LIKE THE HORIZONTAL WINDOW OR REMOVING THE WINDOWS IN THE REAR ON ITEM SIX THAT STAFF IDENTIFIED. SO I CAN WALK THROUGH, UH, EACH OF THE ITEMS THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS FOR DENIAL. IF YOU'D LIKE, YOU COULD FOCUS ON ITEMS ONE, THREE, AND SIX FOR US PLEASE. SO ITEM ONE IS TO EXTEND THE REAR, THE FRONT PORCH. UH, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS INTENDING TO MAKE IT FLUSH TO THE SIDE ADDITION STAFF FINDS THAT THAT WOULD FURTHER, UH, ENHANCE THE NON-CONFORMING CONDITION AND RECOMMENDS AGAINST THAT TO KEEP, UH, THE FRONT PORCH AS IT IS. AND THEN FOR ITEM TWO, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF, AND AS LONG AS THE WINDOWS MATCH, UH, THE REST OF THE HISTORIC WINDOW SIZES IN CONFIGURATION. BUT ITEM THREE IS THE HORIZONTAL BATHROOM WINDOW THAT STAFF ADVISES AGAINST EITHER, UM, TO FEATURE FEATHERED, UH, SIDING OR, UM, POTENTIALLY ADD A FULL WIDTH WINDOW OR FULL, FULL LENGTH, FULL HEIGHT WINDOW. AND THEN ITEM SIX IS, UM, I CAN SHOW YOU THE PHOTO AFTER THIS ELEVATION DRAWING, BUT THERE ARE THREE WINDOWS HIDDEN BEHIND LOUVERS WHERE THAT DOOR IS RIGHT NOW. AND THE DOOR IS CURRENTLY ON THE LEFT SIDE. IT THEY WANT TO REMOVE THE THREE WINDOWS BEHIND LOUVERS AND MOVE THE LEFT SIDE DOOR TO THE RIGHT SIDE. WELL, IN THE APPLICATION, THE DRAWING 62, UH, IF YOU READ THE NOTES, IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT REDOING THE ROOF PITCH ON THAT, UH, ADDITION, NOT JUST EXTENDING THE PORCH. SO THE APPLICANT HAS, UM, CLARIFIED TO STAFF THAT EXTENDING THE PORCH WOULD REQUIRE A ROOF ADDITION AS WELL, AT LEAST TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE. UM, THEY COULD ALSO CONSIDER A SHED ROOF, BUT THAT MIGHT POSE SOME STRUCTURAL, UM, DEFICIENCIES. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS GONNA HELP OR CONFUSE EVERYONE, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE EXISTING HIP ROOF THAT YOU SEE HERE, THAT REPRESENTS THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND ORIGINALLY IT HAD A WRAPAROUND PORCH THAT MADE THAT CORNER, UM, YEAH. AND TERMINATED WHERE WE SEE THAT, THAT ADDITION TO THE RIGHT NOW. SO WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY SEEING WHERE THE ADDITION IS, IS A PORCH ENCLOSURE AND THEN THE REST OF THE PORCH WENT AWAY AND CAME BACK IN A DIFFERENT FORM. UM, SO ONE OF THE REASONS WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT THE PORCH NOW BE EXPANDED UPON IS BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S NO LONGER ALLOWING US TO SEE WHERE THAT ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT IS AND WHERE THE ORIGINAL PORCH WAS. THE MODIFICATION WITH THE SIDE ADDITION INTO A A QUADPLEX, UH, WAS PERFORMED PRIOR TO 1951, AT LEAST PER THE SANDBORN MAP. [02:45:11] THE PICTURE OF THE THREE WINDOWS, THE ONE, UH, THAT'S NEXT TO THE LUVS. THE ONES, YEAH, THOSE THREE, THEY SEEM LIKE, UM, THEY'RE IN BAD SHAPE, BUT THEY ARE ORIGINAL FENESTRATIONS. CORRECT. THEY'RE IN REALLY BAD SHAPE. UH, AND ALSO THEY'RE, I MEAN MOST, UH, LEMME JUST FINISH. SO IT'S, THE FENESTRATION IS ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE, CORRECT? HASN'T BEEN ANY MODIFICATION TO THAT PER STAFF. STAFF IS UNCERTAIN IF THEY'RE ORIGINAL, BUT THEY ARE IN A PATTERN THAT MIGHT BE ORIGINAL AND THERE WOULD, SO WE WOULD RATHER KEEP THOSE AS THEY ARE. WELL, IF, IF, IF I CAN SAY SOMETHING, UM, ON THAT HOUSE, SINCE IT WAS MAKE A TRIPLEX, WE BELIEVE THEY'VE DONE IT A LONG TIME AGO, BUT RIGHT NOW THE WAY IT IS, UM, IN ORDER FOR US TO RESTORE THE HOUSE AND MAKE IT LOOK, I MEAN A NICE HOUSE BECAUSE THAT'S A BEAUTIFUL HOME, WE WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT, BUT WE WILL HAVE TO RELOCATE IF YOU ALLOW US. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE REQUESTING TO REL UH, MOVE, GET RID OF THOSE THREE, UH, WINDOWS AND JUST MOVE THE ORIGINAL DOOR THERE BECAUSE, SO BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS A PLANE, A WALL THAT HAS NO FENESTRATIONS ON ON THAT. YES, WE, WES WILL ONLY KEEP, AND THAT'S THE DIFFICULT PART EITHER, I MEAN ONE IS THE REMOVAL OF THREE WINDOWS, AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT YOU'RE BASICALLY, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE ANY FENESTRATIONS ON THAT. NOT FROM THE STEPS. IF YOU LOOK AT THE STEPS, I MEAN, YEAH, NOT FROM THAT SIDE TO THE LEFT BECAUSE THE WAY WE'RE TRYING TO, UH, DO THAT AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, WE WILL NOT HAVE A SPACE BECAUSE THERE IS A CLOSET THERE. UH, WE HAVE TWO IN THE BACK. WE HAVE, I THINK WE HAVE PLENTY OF WINDOWS. WE HAVE AROUND 15, 15 WINDOWS I BELIEVE THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE HOUSE. UH, WE ARE NOT REMOVING THE FRONT SIDE BECAUSE WE WANT TO KEEP THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS. UH, BUT THE OTHER ONES ARE REALLY IN BAD SHAPE THAT WE'RE REPLACING AND WE ALREADY APPROVED FOR SOME OF THE WINDOWS. UH, THEY'LL BE ALL WOODEN WINDOWS, UH, THE SAME WAY AS THE ORIGINALS ARE. SO WE ARE REQUESTING TO REMOVE THOSE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ACCORDING TO WHAT WE WANNA HAVE FOR A HOME. UH, I DON'T THINK THEY GO WHERE, WHERE WE HAVE 'EM RIGHT NOW, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE THREE WINDOWS, THIS IS NOT THREE GANGED WINDOWS, THIS IS TWO GANGED WINDOWS AND THEN AN EXTRA WINDOW. YES. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ABOUT ONE FOOT APART, RIGHT? YEAH, THEY'RE, THEY HAVE, THEY ONLY HAVE A SIX INCHES IN BETWEEN. SO, OKAY, SO THE DOOR YOU'RE PROPOSING IS GONNA GO IN THE, THE RIGHT MOST WINDOW WE SEE ON THE SCREEN. YEAH. AND IF I'M JUST KIND OF CONNECTING THIS TO THE PLAN, IT SEEMS LIKE THE LEFT, THE LEFTMOST WINDOW THAT IS NOT GANGED PROBABLY SITS IN THE CORNER OF YOUR PROPOSED BEDROOM, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE CLOSET, YES. AND SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE, I MEAN, IF WE CAN, IF, IF, IF WE'RE ALLOW, WE CAN PROBABLY, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO PUT LEAVE ONE WINDOW THERE, BUT WE HAVE A CLOSET THERE, SO, WELL, I I HAVE A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS. I MEAN, I THINK IT'S STRANGE TO HAVE TWO GANGED WINDOWS AND THEN SIX INCHES AWAY ANOTHER WINDOW. SO THERE'S SOMETHING NOT RIGHT ABOUT THAT. BUT I ALSO HAVE A CONCERN OF WIPING OUT THE FENESTRATION ON THAT ELEVATION. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? NOT HAVING ANY, ANY WINDOWS, ANY EVIDENCE OF THE HISTORIC CONDITION. SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO HONE IN ON IS, UH, SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN CAN WE ALLOW FOR A DOOR TO GO IN AND SOME CHANGES AND KEEPS, KEEP ONE OF IT. SO ONE OF, AT LEAST ONE OF THOSE WINDOWS. AND THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO LOOK AT THE SINGLE WINDOW THAT'S NOT GANGED AS ONE OF THOSE POSSIBILITIES. UM, SOMETIMES WHAT WE SUGGEST, AND THIS IS ALSO THE CASE FOR BATHROOM ADDITIONS AND KITCHENS, IS THAT THE WINDOW, AND I, I DON'T, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A GREAT IDEA, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT MAY WORK, IS THAT THAT WINDOW REMAIN, IF IT'S IN THE CLOSET, THE WINDOW CAN REMAIN IN THE CLOSET AND HAVE A BLACKOUT SHUTTER OR IT COULD BE PAINTED IN. I MEAN, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH A WINDOW IN A CLOSET. IF WE CAN RETAIN THE HISTORIC WINDOW AND RETAIN WELL, WE'RE WILLING TO PUT IN ORDER FEATURES OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE FENESTRATION OVER THERE. SO I, I'M TRYING TO FIND A WAY THROUGH THAT ITEM. AND THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I CAN THINK THAT MIGHT BE REASONABLE. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY ELSE UP HERE PART TIME AND I DO, UH, AGREE WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER FISH. THERE COULD BE AN OPTION THERE. I THINK THAT THE, THE PAIRED WINDOW MAY BE MOST ORIGINAL, RIGHT? BECAUSE THAT'S COMMON. WE DON'T KNOW. IS THERE A WAY, IS THERE A PICTURE IN THIS PACKAGE OF THAT WHOLE SIDE OF THE HOUSE AND GET AN IDEA? THIS IS THE DOOR SIDE, BUT THERE ISN'T ONE THAT'S ZOOMED OUT. [02:50:22] WELL, ONE POSSIBLE RATIONALE IN ORDER TO GET A DOOR HERE IS TO, UM, GO OUT WHERE THEY HAVE IT IN THE PLAN FOR THEIR NEW UTILITY ROOM, UH, MAINTAIN THE SINGLE WINDOW THAT'S ON THE FAR LEFT OF THE TRIPLE, UM, AND, UH, LET THEM DEAL WITH, UH, WHETHER IT'S, UH, VISIBLE OR NOT FROM THE INTERIOR. UM, ONE MITIGATING FACT ON THIS IS THAT IT'S ON PART OF THE HOUSE THAT IS STEPPED BACK TWICE FROM THE, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. SO IT'S, UH, NOT THAT VISIBLE FROM THE, FROM THE FRONT. UH, SO MODIFICATION AT THIS LOCATION IS NOT GONNA BE, UH, PROMINENT, BUT YOU'RE ALSO REMOVING THE WINDOW LEFT TO THE DOOR THAT YOU'LL BE REMOVING, UH, LEFT TO THE DOOR. UH, WELL THAT'S WHERE WE PUT IN THE OTHER DOOR. I MEAN THE, THE WINDOW, I'M SORRY. YEAH, THAT DOOR HAS TO BE REMOVED. IT'S, YOU'RE REMOVING THAT DOOR. IT HAS A WINDOW. WE'RE GONNA RELOCATE THAT. WE GONNA RELOCATE. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT PLANT RIGHT NOW, YEAH, WE'RE GONNA RELOCATE IT RIGHT THERE WHERE THE STEPS ARE, BUT WE ARE NOT GONNA USE THAT DOOR BECAUSE IT'S NOT EVEN ORIGINAL. THAT'S REALLY LIKE NEW. SO IN THE FRONT WE HAVE TWO DOORS, TWO ORIG ORIGINAL DOORS. LET ME JUST, IS THERE A WINDOW LEFT OF THAT DOOR THAT YOU'RE ELIMINATING? AM I SEEING THAT ON THE PICTURE OR NOT THAT ONE? YEAH. YES. ARE YOU ELIMINATING THAT AS WELL? YES. OKAY. SO WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT ELIMINATING FOUR WINDOWS ON THAT PLANE. THIS PER OF THE, THE PHOTO WHERE THE, THE STRUCTURE PRETTY MUCH SPLITS IN HALF IS A, AN ADDITION STAFF, I THINK BELIEVE APPROVED THAT REMOVAL OF THAT WINDOW ALREADY. BUT YOU RE YOU KNOW, THINKING THAT THE OTHER THREE WERE STILL GONNA REMAIN OR WAS THIS GONNA BE REMOVED BECAUSE IT'S AN ADDITION? CORRECT. IT'S A NON HISTORIC FEATURE. IT'S A SMALLER WINDOW SIZE AS WELL. AND ALL THE, ALL THE WINDOWS THAT WE HAVE THERE, THERE ARE 33.75 INCHES, WHICH IS, WE BELIEVE IT WAS STANDARDIZED OR ORIGIN, ORIGINAL SIZE. THE WINDOWS WE'RE TRYING TO REMOVE, SOME OF 'EM ARE 22, ANOTHER ONE IS 24. SO THAT'S WHY WE THINK THEY'RE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE. I KNOW THEY WERE DONE PROBABLY A LONG TIME AGO AND THEY TRY, THEY WERE TRYING TO DO IT THE SAME, AT THE SAME STYLE AS THE OTHER WINDOWS. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SIZE, THOSE WINDOWS ARE, ARE REALLY NARROW. SO THEY'RE NOT, NOT INTO, UM, THE ORIGINAL SIZES OF THE HOUSE WINDOWS THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE HOUSE. I'M HAVING A HARD TIME, UM, ACCEPTING WHAT'S, I MEAN, I SEE A TIMELINE ON THIS. SO DID WE LOOK AT ALL OF THESE REQUESTS LAST TIME ON JUNE OR ONLY THE FRONT DOOR MODIFICATIONS? ONLY THE FRONT DOOR MODIFICATIONS WERE CONSIDERED LAST TIME THIS PROPERTY WAS AT A HEARING. AND THEN THERE WERE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS FOR GENERAL REPAIRS AND REMOVAL OF NON HISTORIC ELEMENTS. SO, BUT THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION RECEIVED IS JUNE 26TH. IS THAT BECAUSE IT'S A MODIFICATION OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION? CONSIDERED WHAT, UH, STAFF WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT WHO POSTPONED IT FOR MORE INFORMATION. SO IT'S BEEN POSTPONED AND POSTPONED AND POSTPONED. UH, JUST ONCE, ONE TIME FOR, FOR THIS SET. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. SO JUNE 26TH AND WE'RE, OUR 60 DAY REVIEW IS AUGUST 25TH, ALL OF MONTH OF JULY WITH TWO MEETING. IN ONE MEETING, THERE WAS A SEPARATE REQUEST THAT WAS ALREADY HEARD. THIS IS A SEPARATE APPLICATION AND IT WAS POSTPONED ONCE VIA EMAIL WITH THE ORIGINAL APPLICANT. BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE AN ACTION TODAY OR CAN WE WAIT? YOU CAN POSTPONE IT AGAIN IF YOU, IF YOU'RE REFERRING IT TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OR REQUESTING MORE INFORMATION, WE HAVE ANOTHER MEETING WHERE WE CAN TAKE ACTION BEFORE THE APPLICATION EXPIRES. YEAH, I JUST WANT TO KNOW THE REASONING WHY. I MEAN, I WANNA MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT KNOWS THAT THAT WOULD BE THEN MAYBE THE LAST TIME, RIGHT? BUT MAYBE TAKE [02:55:01] ADVANTAGE OF A D R C. I DO FEEL LIKE THERE'S SOME ITEMS HERE THAT WE CAN'T TAKE LIGHTLY. WELL, I MEAN MY POSITION IS I AGREE WITH STAFF ON ITEMS ONE AND TWO, SO I'M NOT WILLING TO SUPPORT THOSE TWO ITEMS AS YOU'VE PROPOSED 'EM AT THAT POINT. BUT CAN I MODIFY THE ROOF, UH, KNOWING THAT IN THE, NOT THE ROOF, THE, THE ACTUAL ROOM WHERE I'M TELLING YOU THAT ONE IT WAS ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THE ONE ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS, I MEAN WE HAD TO TALKING TO THE FRAMER, WE NEED TO LIFT THAT PITCH BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S NOT AT THE RIGHT ANGLES. THINK I THINK THAT ONE WAS THEY NEVER HAD PERMITS FOR THAT ROOM. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT THING THAT WE COULD RESOLVE ON A SITE VISIT. IF YOU HAVE TIME FOR THAT, IF YOU WOULD ALLOW US TO GO OUT ON THE SITE VISIT AND TALK ABOUT SOME OF THESE, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK I CAN GET THERE IN THIS ROOM. OKAY, HERE ON THAT, ON, ON ITEMS ONE AND THREE, ON ITEM SIX, THAT'S THE THREE WINDOW REPLACEMENT I THINK I DISCUSSED. I THINK MAYBE THERE'S SOME MIDDLE GROUND THERE THAT CAN BE HAD, WE COULD SORT OUT ON THE SITE AS WELL. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. COULD WE MAKE AN ACTION ON ITEMS 2, 4, 5, 7, AND EIGHT TODAY AND UM, REQUEST A D R C FOR ITEMS ONE, THREE AND SIX? YES, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS ON ITEMS 2, 4, 5, 7, AND EIGHT AND MOVE TO UH, ITEMS ONE, THREE AND SIX TWO AT D R C SECOND WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SORRY IF I DIDN'T INCLUDE IT. STAFF STIPULATIONS AMENDED AS SO. MOTION A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. I'LL OPPOSE SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. [B36 19-5792 Address/Description: 149 E MULBERRY AVE HDRC Case No.: 2019-413 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: Alida Alamilla/ALAMILLA ALIDA Request: Exterior modifications, removal of an accessory structure, and construction of an addition City Council Dist.: 1] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER B 36, CASE NUMBER 20 19 4 13 AT 1 49 EAST MULBERRY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, INSTALL A COMPOSITION SHINGLE HIP ROOF OVER THE EXISTING FLAT ROOFS ON THE SIDE AND REAR BAYS OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. TWO, TO INSTALL A COMPOSITION SHINGLE SHED ROOF OVER THE EXISTING FLAT ROOF ON THE STUCCO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. THREE, REMOVE THE NON HISTORIC WOOD INFILL ON THE STUCCO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FACING MCCULLOUGH AND FOUR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ONTO THE STUCCO ACCESSORY FEATURING THREE GARAGE BAYS. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH FOUR BASED ON FINDINGS B THROUGH F. WHILE EACH REQUEST MAY BE THEORETICALLY APPROPRIATE, STAFF REMAINS CONCERNED ABOUT THE CRAFTSMANSHIP OF THE WORK THAT WAS PERFORMED PRIOR TO APPROVAL AND PERMITTING. MEASURED DRAWINGS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW, INCLUDING A ROOF PLAN FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, ELEVATION, PLANS FOR THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND ITS PROPOSED EDITION AND A SITE PLAN OF THE EXISTING THREE STRUCTURES AND THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS. HIS COMMENT ON NOVEMBER 6, 6, 20 18 STAFF FOUND THAT ROOF ADDITIONS WERE INSTALLED ON THE PRIMARY AND STUCCO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND THAT THE STUCCO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WAS SUBJECTED TO FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS PRIOR TO APPROVAL OR PERMITTING. THE APPLICANT WAS COOPERATIVE TO STOP WORK AND COMMITTED TO ADDRESSING WORK WITHOUT APPROVAL UPON THEIR RETURN FROM WORK-RELATED LEAVE. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A REQUEST TO BE HEARD AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE H D R C HEARING ON JULY 12TH, 2019 AFTERNOON. OH, GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU. HI, HOW ARE YOU? MY NAME IS ALIDA ALAMIA AND THIS IS MY HOME AT 1 4 9 EAST MULBERRY. I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST APOLOGIZE 'CAUSE I'VE ALWAYS SPOKEN TO THE TWO THAT WE HAVE HERE. I BOTHERED THEM ENOUGH BECAUSE I TRUSTED THE PEOPLE THAT WERE DOING THE WORK FOR ME TO GET THE PERMITS AND BASICALLY FOUND OUT THEY LIED TO ME. SO NOW WE ARE KIND OF DOING THIS THING BACKWARD AND I, I'M NORMALLY NOT A PERSON TO DO THINGS BACKWARD. UM, IF I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DIFFERENT, UM, WHATEVER THE DIFFERENT ONES THAT YOU'RE WORKING, YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENT DISAPPROVAL NUMBERS ARE. THE ITEMS. THE ITEMS, YEAH, SURE. I CAN WALK THROUGH THE ITEMS WITH, UM, THE COMMISSION GUIDING THE CONVERSATION. YES, PLEASE. UM, SO ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF, HIP ROOF OVER THE EXISTING FLAT ROOFS. SO STAFF'S FINDING REGARDING THAT, UH, ITEM IS THAT THE FLAT ROOF ADDITIONS ONTO THE STRUCTURE, UM, MAY BE ELIGIBLE TO, MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE, UH, HIP ROOFS TO MATCH THE PRIMARY ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. HOWEVER, UH, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PHOTO, THERE MIGHT BE SOME, UM, SOME SHODDY CONSTRUCTION AND WE WOULD REALLY LIKE A ROOF PLAN SUBMITTED TO FEEL COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. [03:00:02] YOU OKAY WITH THAT? YES. THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT IS PHOTOGRAPH THERE. YES, I WAS CONCERNED AS WELL, BELIEVE ME, , IT DOESN'T, I'M VERY, I'M KIND OF O C D AND ALL THE LINES AND STUFF DIDN'T ACTUALLY, THAT ESPECIALLY DID NOT WORK AND THEY JUST COULDN'T, UM, THEY KEPT, WE HAD REALLY BAD WEATHER AND THEY KEPT SAYING, WELL, WE JUST WANNA COVER IT BEFORE ANYTHING BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF DETERIORATION INSIDE. AND I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO EVERYBODY ELSE AND THOSE, MY WINDOWS ARE TERRIBLE AND I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO EVERYBODY ELSE AND I'M THINKING NOBODY HAS SEEN THE INSIDE. I DO HAVE SOME PICTURES THAT NOT EVEN THEY HAVE SEEN, BUT, UM, SO IT WAS KIND OF LIKE BEAT THE WEATHER TYPE THING, BUT I KEPT TELLING THEM LIKE, WHY CAN YOU ALL NOT GET THAT STRAIGHT? BECAUSE WHO IS DOING THIS FOR YOU? SOMETHING, SOMETHING'S REALLY WRONG THERE. YES. WHAT, WHAT WAS THE ROOF UP THERE BEFORE? THIS WAS A FLAT ROOF. WELL, IT WAS FLAT SH SH UM, SPLASH. SO BASICALLY YOU WERE ALREADY TRYING TO DO A LEDGE OVER. THAT'S WHAT YOU WANTED. YOU WANTED A LEDGE OVER, RIGHT? YOU DIDN'T WANT THE ROOF TO BE FLUSH WHEN, BECAUSE THE INSIDE THE EVERYTHING DRIPS ON THE INSIDE, WHOEVER FROM WHAT I HAVE. SO MA'AM, FROM THE BEGINNING YOU'RE TRYING TO DO A ROOF THAT I DON'T SEE THAT ANYWHERE ELSE BECAUSE IT IT WAS FLAT, CORRECT? IT WAS FLAT, YES. NOW I'VE NEVER SEEN PICTURES OF THE HOUSE PRIOR TO HOW I BOUGHT IT. AND I EVEN SPOKE TO MR. FA AND HE SAID MAYBE HE COULD FIND ME SOME WHEN I BOUGHT THE HOUSE, I REMEMBER CALLING THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY AND THEY TOLD ME MY HOUSE DOES NOT EXIST. AT WHICH POINT I TOLD THEM, WELL I HOPE. WELL, THERE'S A VERY GOOD PICTURE OF NOVEMBER, 2017 THAT SHOWS, UH, ALL THE ROOF LINES. EXACTLY, YES. I, I CAN SEE THAT. BUT BASED ON WHAT I'VE SEEN ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD, EVEN ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME, ANYBODY WHO HAD FLAT ROOFS, IT'S BASICALLY SOMETHING YOU CAN WALK ON AND YOU EXIT THE HOUSE TO IT. IT IS NOT ADJOINING IT. AND MY UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE OF THE FLOORS ON THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE AS WELL WAS THAT THEY PROBABLY HAD THE HOUSE CAUGHT OFF AT SOME POINT AND THEY ADDED LIKE THE SUNROOM AND THEN HAD LIKE A VERANDA ON THE TOP BECAUSE THE BACK ADDITION DEFINITELY HAD A WINDOW FROM THE INSIDE GOING UP THE STAIRS, WHICH I ENCLOSED INTO THAT BACK ROOM. AND I'M THINKING THAT THE SAME WAY THEY ADDED ON THE BACK, THEY ADDED ON THE SIDE AND IT WAS CHEAPER FOR THEM TO JUST FLATTEN OUT THE ROOF THAN TO ACTUALLY EXTEND THE WHOLE ROOF, WHICH THEN NOT, DID NOT MAKE IT VERY WATERPROOF OR ANYTHING ELSE. BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THAT YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF MODIFICATION, NOT ONLY ON ONE CORNER, IT'S ACTUALLY ALL THE WAY AROUND THE HOUSE. SO IF YOU COME WITH THOSE DRAWINGS, THERE MAY BE SOME, SOME CHANGES AS WELL. SOME THINGS THAT YOU KNOW, WELL, I WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE DIDN'T HAVE TO THROW AWAY THE MONEY. BUT THIS WAS BASICALLY STARTED WITH THE INSURANCE. THEY CAME IN FOR SOMETHING FOR WATER DAMAGE INSIDE AND THEY SAID, HAVE YOU HAD YOUR ROOF CHECKED? AND I SAID, NO, I TRAVEL BACK AND FORTH A LOT, SO I'M NOT ALWAYS HERE. AND THEY SAID, WELL WE, YOU NEED TO HAVE THAT DONE IMMEDIATELY AND IF YOU DO NOT AND IF YOU DON'T START TO DO THESE THINGS, WE MAY NOT COVER YOU ANYMORE. SO THAT'S HOW THAT STARTED. AND THEN IT BECAME THIS RUSH. BELIEVE ME, I SPOKE TO AT LEAST SEVEN DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND THEN ENDED UP WITH THESE PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN DOING LIKE, YOU KNOW, LITTLE OFF THE SIDE JOBS FOR ME AND HE SAID, OH, I'LL GET SOMEBODY THAT WE'RE WORKING IN DEVELOPMENT WITH AND WE'LL DO IT FOR YOU. AND I GOT STUCK WITH THIS, BUT BASICALLY THE WATER PROBLEM WAS, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE REMOVED SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE ACTUALLY PROTECTING SOME LIKE LITTLE AWNINGS WHERE ON ONE SIDE, NO, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY AWNINGS. YEP. UH, KEEP GOING THERE ON THAT FAR RIGHT. OH, I PUT THAT UP TOO BECAUSE THE WATER KEPT GOING INSIDE THE WALL. THAT'S WHERE MARK CALMLY, I WOULD SAY IS. SO THAT WAS NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE. DO NOW IT HAS BEEN REMOVED. I'M, I'M, I'M REALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE EXTENT OF THE MODIFICATION WAS THIS, THERE'S A PARA PITT UP THERE, RIGHT? THERE'S ABOUT EIGHT INCHES OF WALL, RIGHT? THAT GOES ALL THE WAY AROUND AND A FLAT ROOF AND A ROOF DRAIN THAT GOES TO A GUTTER. OFTENTIMES THERE NEEDS TO BE REPAIR AT THE GUTTER AND WHEN THAT'S NOT MAINTAINED, THE ROOF TURNS INTO A SWIMMING POOL, JUST REQUIRES MAINTEN. SO WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THAT PARA PITT? IS IT STILL THERE? IS THIS THAT IS STILL UNDER THAT? YES. JUST SITTING ON TOP? MM-HMM. , I, I MEAN I JUST, BASED ON WHAT I SEE THERE, THAT FRAMING PROBABLY CANNOT STAY, IT WON'T PASS ANY INSPECTION AND I THINK WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE IT, IT SIGNIFICANT ISSUE WITH IT. THE, THE HEIGHT, IF WE CAN LOOK BACK IN TIME, WHICH I'M SURE YOU CAN'T DO RIGHT NOW. THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL PARAPET AND UM, SCUPPER DRAINS ALONG THE BACK AND ON THE SIDE. SO MY GUESS IS RIGHT NOW THAT THERE'S A CAVITY IN BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL ROOF, THE ORIGINAL FLAT ROOF, [03:05:01] THE FRAMING OF THE NEW ROOF IS SOMEHOW SITTING ON TOP OF THE PARAPET. IT'S NOT, THEY WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO. OKAY. I WASN'T UP THERE WITH THEM. I HAD HAD THEM TAKEN PICTURES AND STUFF WHILE THEY WERE THERE TO SEND, TO GIVE TO ME OR SEND TO ME. UM, I SPECIFICALLY TOLD THEM I DID NOT WANT ANYTHING RESTING ON BECAUSE THAT THOSE PARAPET WERE SO ROTTED OUT AND I TOOK PICTURES FOR THE INSURANCE AND THEY MOSTLY SAID, WELL WE'RE NOT GONNA PAY FOR ANYTHING THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF AGE HAS BEEN DAMAGED. SO I TOLD THEM, YOU CANNOT PUT ANYTHING ON ANYTHING THAT'S ROTTING OUT. YOU NEED TO RECONSTRUCT AND MAKE THAT OVER WHETHER THAT'S UNDER THERE OR NOT. OKAY. SO I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. SO AFTER ALL THIS WORK TO PUT, TO PUT EVES AROUND IT, IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A FLAT OR VERY NEAR FLAT SURFACE ON TOP OF THE FLAT ROOF THAT WAS THERE. AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ROOFED IN SHINGLES THAT YOU MEAN ON THE CORNER THERE? YEAH, LIKE IF YOU FOLLOW THAT EAVE KIND OF UP, IT FLATTENS OUT IN ONE OF THE SATELLITE IMAGES, I THINK WE CAN KIND OF SEE THAT THERE'S A FLAT ROOF WITH KIND OF THESE EAVES GOING AROUND ACCORDING TO THE GUYS THAT WERE TRYING TO MATCH THE EAVES THAT WERE ALREADY ON THE HOUSE. RIGHT. AND THEN THEY JUST STOPPED AT ONE POINT. LOOK RIGHT THERE, RIGHT THERE. WELL I STOPPED THEM WHEN I SAW THAT CORNER THAT LOOKED SO THE FLAT THAT LOOKED. SO I DON'T THINK WIGGLING ON DON WE'RE GOING ANYWHERE. I DO THINK THAT COMMISSIONER FISH HAVE A POINT, A SITE VISIT. THERE'S ALSO A BACK ROOF THAT HAS BEEN CHANGED, UH, FROM FLAT TO A LITTLE BIT OF A, HAS A LITTLE BIT OF A PITCH. SO, WHICH I DON'T THINK EITHER IS, AND THAT ONE WE DID IN ACCORDANCE TO THE GARAGE BECAUSE WE HAVE A CARPORT NEXT TO IT. AND THEN, UM, I TOLD HIM BASICALLY EVERYTHING WILL HAVE TO SUPPOSEDLY MATCH. SO IF YOU HAVE A CARPORT WITH THAT KIND OF A ROOFING, THAT ONE WAS THE SAME EXCEPT THE LEVELS OF COURSE ARE HIGHER. 'CAUSE THAT BUILDING WAS ALREADY HIGHER TO BEGIN WITH. SO YOUR GARAGE ORIGINALLY WAS FLAT AND YOU CHANGED THAT AS WELL TO HAVE A PITCH. SO YOU DID THE SO IT WOULD MATCH THE CARPORT? YEAH. WELL, BECAUSE YOU'RE CHANGING THE CARPORT ON THAT, YOU HAVE NOT DONE APPROVED EITHER. WELL, I, NO, NO, NO. I DID NOT CHANGE THE CARPORT AT ALL. I ADDED THAT AFTERWARDS WHEN MS. SOMAN UM, TOLD ME, I SAID BASICALLY WHAT I WAS DOING WAS TRYING TO SAVE THE HOUSE AND I SAID, WHAT DO I DO? I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO HERE OR THERE. AND SHE SUGGESTED, WELL MAYBE YOU OUGHT TO PUT IN SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE. AND I SAID, FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, I WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE THE BACK BECAUSE I'VE HAD, MY SON CAME TO VISIT FOR THANKSGIVING AND HE GOT HIS STUFF STOLEN OUTTA THE CAR WHILE HE WAS GOING BACK AND FORTH TO THE HOUSE TO GET IT. AND I'VE ALSO HAD BEEN EGGED AND THEN THERE ARE PEOPLE NEXT TO ME THAT HAVE APARTMENTS AND PEOPLE THAT END UP PARKING NEXT TO ME THAT I DON'T KNOW. AND I HAVE TO CALL THE MANAGER AND SAY, CAN YOU PLEASE TELL THESE YOUNG MEN THAT THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO PARK? I'M JUST GONNA ASK YOU, WAS THERE A FLAT ROOF ORIGINALLY AND NOW IT HAS A PITCH? YES, IT WAS SIMILAR TO THE ONE ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. THEY'RE BOTH THE SAME PARAPET ROOFS. SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING, YOU INSTALL, YOU WANNA, YOU'RE ASKING JUST TO INSTALL COMPOSITION SHINGLE SHED ROOF. I'M, I DON'T SEE A, A REQUEST FOR CHANGING THE PITCH OF IT THAT, UM, NO, THERE WAS NOT A REQUEST BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, THEY TOLD ME THIS WAS ALL REQUESTED AND IT WASN'T, HONESTLY, NO, EVEN ON THIS ONE, ITEM NUMBER TWO, IT SAYS A EXISTING FLAT ROOF. YEAH. TO BECOME A SHED COMPOSITION ROOF, THE SHED IMPLIES THE SLOPE CHANGE. UM, AND THEN STAFFING CAN, UM, ADD SOME INSIGHT ON THIS ITEM AS WELL. UM, THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU SEE HERE FACING MCCULLOUGH APPEAR IS, DOES NOT APPEAR ON THE 1951 SANDBORN MAP. SO STAFF BELIEVES THAT IT WAS CONSTRUCTED AFTER 1951. UM, THERE IS ANOTHER WOOD ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT WAS ON THE, ON THE 1911 SANDBORN MAP, UM, WHICH HASN'T BEEN ALTERED OR REQUESTED TO BE ALTERED, BUT, UM, STAFF IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPLICATION OF EXTENDING THE NON HISTORIC STUCCO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OVER THE, OVER THE, UM, THE, UH, CARPORT AND POTENTIALLY AFFECTING ANY STRUCTURE OR FOOTPRINT ON THIS BACK END. SO THERE'S QUITE A, A LOT OF, UM, OF ITEMS TO CONSIDER. HAVE YOU SHOWN THEM? I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE SEEN THIS WAY AND THE REASON WHY THIS WAS DONE. IT WASN'T A JUST THOUGH I DECIDED ONE DAY I WANTED A DIFFERENT ROOF. BUT IF WE CAN JUST SEE THE, THE THE WAY, HONESTLY, I WOULD LOVE TO KNOCK THAT THING DOWN. I DO NOT LIKE . BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO A SHED BECAUSE ON THE HOUSE THEY DID A SHED ROOF. RIGHT. SO BASICALLY BECAUSE OF IT WAS REFERRED TO MATCH. EXACTLY, YEAH. SO BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE, UNAPPROVED CHANGE ON THE HOUSE, YOU'RE TRYING TO CHANGE . EXACTLY. SO I DON'T, I WOULD PREFER TO THAT IF WE COULD ACTUALLY, YEAH. SO I WOULD MOVE THIS TO HER DRCS AND SITE VISIT, BUT I MEAN THERE'S, I THINK, UH, THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO START WORKING ON GETTING CONSTRUCTION. [03:10:01] YEAH, AND I WOULD, I WOULD SUPPORT IT GOING TO THE D R C, BUT I'D ALSO SAY TO THE APPLICANT THAT THIS IS SO FAR OUTTA BOUNDS THAT I THINK, UH, STAFF IS RIGHT ABOUT THIS AS FAR AS THE CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CRAFTSMANSHIP AND HOW IT IS DRAMATICALLY CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF, OF THE EXISTING HOUSE THAT, UH, I COULDN'T SUPPORT AN APPROVAL OF WHAT YOU HAVE OUT THERE. SO NOW MAY I ASK SOMETHING? I THINK THE MAIN POINT OF GOING OUT TO THE D R C IS TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT IS THERE AND BETTER UNDERSTAND IT. BUT JUST KNOW THAT I, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME, UM, SEEING HOW THIS COULD COMPLY AT ALL WITH ANY OF THE GUIDELINES THAT WE'RE ASKED TO FOLLOW IT. MY QUESTION WOULD BE THIS, IT IS MY OPINION, THESE WERE TWO THE LADIES AT SOME POINT, AND OF COURSE THEY MAY HAVE PASSED AWAY BY NOW AND I NEVER GOT A CHANCE TO TALK TO THEM. I WISH I COULD. UM, REALTORS DON'T LIKE YOU TO TALK TO THE OWNERS AND SINCE I SPEAK A LOT, I GUESS THEY DON'T WANT ME TO ASK TOO MANY QUESTIONS. UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE WERE LIKE PORCHES THAT THEY COVERED UP FROM THE WAY I LIVE INSIDE THE HOUSE AND I'VE SEEN IT. UM, AND I THINK THAT THEY DID THIS TO MAKE IT MORE FEASIBLE TO THEM IN THEIR POCKETS, WHICH I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. THERE IS NOTHING, LIKE I SAID, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I FIND SIMILAR. THERE ARE MANY HOUSES SIMILAR TO MINE ON DIFFERENT CORNERS OF MCCULLOUGH, ALMOST LIKE EVERY SO MANY BLOCKS. HOWEVER, NONE OF THEM MATCHED MY HOUSE BEFORE. I HAVE, I HAVE A SUGGESTION. IF YOU HAVE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE THAT THE FLAT ROOF WASN'T ORIGINAL AND THE PARAPETS WEREN'T ORIGINAL, AND THAT THAT WAS SOMEHOW MODIFIED OR SOMETHING, THEN HOW WOULD I KNOW? EXCEPT FOR THE INSIDE, THE ONLY THING I CAN TELL IS THAT INSIDE OF THE FLOORS, THEY'RE DIFFERENT. THE FLOORS ARE WELL WORN AND I HAVE THEM HERE, THEY DON'T HAVE THEM. AND THEN YOU GET TO THAT AREA AND THE FLOORS ARE NEW. SO I, THE BOARDS ARE DIFFERENT. I DO SUSPECT THAT THAT'S AN ADDITION. THAT MAY HAVE BEEN A PORCH THAT WAS CLOSED IN OVER TIME. RIGHT. THAT THEY CLOSED IT. BUT EVEN IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE WOULDN'T ALLOW A CHANGE IN THE ROOF PROFILE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO REMAIN LIKE A FLAT ROOF. RIGHT. SO I MEAN, THE, THE MODIFICATIONS DONE OVER TIME TO THE PORCH WOULD COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES UNTIL THIS LAST ONE. THAT'S A DRAMATIC CHANGE IN THE CHARACTER OF THE ADDITION. IT CONFUSES THE ADDITION FROM THE MAIN STRUCTURE AND THAT THE EVE WRAPS AROUND. THERE'S A WHOLE HOST OF ISSUES TO UNPACK. SO I WOULD SUPPORT A SITE VISIT IN A D R C, BUT RIGHT NOW, I, I FEEL STRONGLY THAT STAFF HAS THIS. RIGHT. AND I DON'T, I THINK A A D R C MAY HELP IN FINDING SOME RESOLUTION, FIXING THE PROBLEM. I THINK, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE IN YOUR INTEREST, INTERESTED TO A D R C TO GET SOME ADVICE FROM, UH, THE COMMISSIONERS. BUT I, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IT'S GONNA MOVE US SORT OF PROVING WHAT EXACTLY HAS BEEN DONE, JUST SO THAT YOUR EXPECTATIONS ARE GONNA BE CLEAR. NO, I JUST, I JUST FIGURED THAT I LOOKED AT EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TOLD THEM, OKAY, THIS WAS ADDED ON. IT'S SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE SOMETHING ELSE. MAKE SURE IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT EVERYTHING ELSE IS, UH, NOT THIS ADDED ON THING, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WAS OBVIOUSLY NOT WORKING EITHER. SO, AND THO THOSE IMAGES MAY HELP US TO FIND SOME RESOLUTION ON THE SITE. SO IF YOU HAVE, SOME OF THOSE IMAGES JUST HAVE, NOT FROM MY HOUSE, BUT THE OTHER ONES, THAT'S OKAY. YES. OKAY. THAT'S FINE. OH, YES, I PASS 'EM ALL THE TIME. SO THEY'RE THERE. AND ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID IN, IN THE GARAGE, IT WOULD'VE BEEN MY PREFERENCE TO ASK IF I CAN REMOVE IT COMPLETELY, BECAUSE IT IS VERY, THAT IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN UNTIL YOU, THAT'LL, THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN. THE ONLY WAY YOU'LL BE ABLE TO GET A REMOVAL OF THAT IS THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS TO OVERRULE. HAVE THEY, DO THEY HAVE THOSE PICTURES IN THEIR POCKET? UM, WE, MR. CHAIRMAN, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. HAVE A MOTION YET? YES. OKAY. A MOTION A SECOND TO SEND THIS TO D R C AND SIDE VISIT ANY FURTHER? I, I DID THE MOTION, BUT I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHO SECOND. I WILL SECOND IT. I, OKAY. NOW WE HAVE A MOTION, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A CLEAR MOTION, SEND THIS TO A SITE VISIT WITH A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. UM, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. I'LL OPPOSE SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. SO STAFF WILL WORK WITH YOU TO ARRANGE THAT. UM, OKAY. PROBABLY BE BEFORE THE NEXT, THEN YOU'D COME BACK TO THE NEXT, UH, COMMISSION MEETING. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER [B37 19-5719 Address/Description: 407 DEVINE ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-418 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Adriene Wilson Request: Fence height amendment City Council Dist.: 1] B 37, CASE NUMBER 20 19 4 18 AT 4 0 7 DIVINE STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO AMEND THE HEIGHT OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FRONT YARD FENCE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF, BASED ON FINDING B THROUGH D STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FENCE BE REDUCED TO FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME'S ADRIAN WILSON. UM, I HAVE SOME PHOTOS HERE THAT I BROUGHT JUST TO KIND OF SHOW THAT. [03:15:01] UM, THE BIGGEST ISSUE I HAVE IN MY HOME IS SECURITY . I I HAVE A NEIGHBOR WHO, UM, HAS, UM, THREATENED TO PHYSICALLY AND SEXUALLY ASSAULT ME, AND HE LIVES RIGHT DIRECTLY TO MY RIGHT TO MY LEFT. AND SO, UM, I GOT A DOG AND HE'S A GERMAN SHEPHERD. AND I'VE, I'VE DID ELEVATE THE FENCE A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND THIS PICTURE HERE, YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, THAT'S MY NEIGHBOR'S FENCE AND THERE'S MY FENCE AND THERE'S THE DIFFERENTIAL IN THE, IN THE HEIGHT. SO, UM, GUNNY IS MY DOG AND HE'S A GERMAN SHEPHERD, AND HE'S QUITE BIG AND I KNOW THAT HE WOULD JUMP A FOUR FOOT FENCE EASILY. AND, UM, THAT WAS MY ONE OF BIGGER CONCERNS. THIS NEIGHBOR THAT I HAVE CONTINUES TO ENCROACH. I MEAN, A TRESPASS ON MY PROPERTY, AND I HAVE SEVERAL POLICE REPORTS HERE. UM, SAFE IS INVOLVED, SAFE OFFICERS. AND ALSO, UM, I HAVE, UM, A CERTIFICATE OF, UM, UM, TRESPASSING THAT THE SAFE OFFICERS TOLD ME TO, TO GET AN AFFIDAVIT OF TRESPASSING, CRIMINAL TRESPASSING. AND SO, UM, THE, I'M I'M ASKING IF I CAN PLEASE LEAVE THE FENCE, THE HEIGHT THAT IT IS, UM, THE SIDE FENCE, IS THAT THE OTHER CONCERN OR IS IT JUST THE FENCE IN THE FRONT? UH, THE FRONT FENCE IS DEFINED BY ANYTHING IN THE FRONT FACADE PLANE OF THE HOME. SO BOTH THE CATTLE PANEL AND THAT VERTICAL WOOD FENCE WOULD ALL NEED TO BE REDUCED TO FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT PAST THE FRONT FACE OF THE HOUSE. OKAY. SO AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS PHOTO, THE, UM, MY PORCH ALIGN WITH HIS PORCH. AND SO I DID ELEVATE THAT. UM, I, I KNOW I REQUESTED TO FOR IT TO BE FOUR FEET, AND THEN I ELEVATED IT BECAUSE WHEN I DRIVE UP TO MY DRIVEWAY, UM, HE GREETS ME AND CALLS ME NAMES AND THROWS TRASH ON MY DRIVEWAY. AND, UM, UM, UM, JUST, IT'S JUST A BAD SITUATION. SO I DON'T WANNA SEE HIM WHEN I COME IN TO, FROM A LONG DAY OF WORK. AND STAFF, SHOW US THE CONTEXT OF, I THINK I HAVE MR. ZERO. WE, MY NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THERE ARE FENCES THAT ARE FIVE FEET IN THE FRONT AND, UH, WITH THE SAME CATTLE PANEL, UM, ON THE 500 BLOCK AND FURTHER DOWN ON MY 400 BLOCK, THERE'S ONE YOU CAN SEE THAT'S SIX FEET IN FRONT, UM, GO DOWN. I'M ONLY ASKING FOR ME FOR, YOU KNOW, TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THE FURTHER DOWN WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU TURN RIGHT ON BERNIE, WHICH IS THE CROSS STREET, THERE'S ANOTHER FENCE, UH, EXACTLY LIKE MINE, EXCEPT WITHOUT THE ILS, THE SIDE FENCE. UM, HOW LONG AGO DID YOU INSTALL THAT? UM, OVER THE LAST YEAR. AND WHEN I DID, IT WAS MY MISTAKE WHEN I SAID WOOD PICKET FENCE, I WAS THINKING THAT LATER, KATIE, MS. TOTMAN EXPLAINED TO ME A PICKET FENCE HAS GOT SEPARATION IN IT. I'M THINKING IT'S THE WOOD THAT JUST 'CAUSE I WROTE THE, THE REQUEST, IT WAS JUST THE WOOD PICKETS THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, MY THOUGHT. BUT, UM, THIS PERSON HAS JUMPED MY FENCE ON THE SIDE AND I'VE CAUGHT HIM OUTSIDE MY WINDOWS. UM, I FEEL LIKE I FEEL VERY SECURE WITH THE FENCE THE WAY IT IS. I, I'M, I CAN GET MAYBE ESCALATED LIKE THAT IF I CAN. THAT PORCH AREA THAT'S, THAT'S HIGHER THAN IT SHOULD BE. I MEAN, BUT, UM, I'M JUST ASKING IF I CAN KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS. I, I HAVE A QUESTION. IS YOUR NEIGHBOR RENTING OR IS HE OWNED THAT? NO, HE'S PERMANENT. SO THERE'S NO CHANCE OF HIM GOING AWAY ANYTIME SOON? NOT AT ALL. AND I, I, I, UM, I JUST, I INHERITED THIS HOME IN 2012. I MOVED INTO IT AND IT WAS IN EXTREMELY POOR CONDITION. AND, UM, I HAVE WORKED REALLY HARD TO, UH, KEEP THE INTEGRITY OF THE HOME. [03:20:01] I REPLACED. I DIDN'T EVEN REPLACE ALL THE WINDOWS. I HAD 'EM ALL RE UH, RE ROPED. AND I'VE WORKED REALLY HARD TO, UM, TRY TO MAKE IT MY HOME, BUT I WANNA FEEL SAFE THERE. WELL, I, YOU KNOW, I COMMEND YOU ON, IT'S CLEAR EVEN JUST FROM THE STREET HERE, THAT, UH, THE, THE HOUSE IS WELL LOVED AND WELL TAKEN CARE OF, AND YOU SHOULD FEEL SAFE, YOUR, AND I THINK IN, IN THIS EXTREME CASE, AND SINCE YOU HAVE COURT ORDERS AND POLICE EVIDENCE THAT I HOPE YOU'VE SHARED WITH STAFF, I COULD SUPPORT, UH, RETAINING THE FENCE AS YOU HAVE IT CONSTRUCTED. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS, UH, SUBMITTED ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. I, I, I'M GOING TO VOTE, VOTE AGAINST THIS. ALTHOUGH I, I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY, UH, WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM AND THE SITUATION AND THE NEED FOR IT. UM, I'D PROBABLY BE MORE COMFORTABLE, UM, VOTING, UM, FOR DENIAL AND FOR THE ISSUE TO BE DEALT WITH WITHIN 12 TO 18 MONTHS, WHICH WOULDN'T GIVE YOU SOME TIME TO DEAL WITH IT. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE SUPPORT, UH, FOR APPROVAL HERE TODAY. SO, I, I MEAN, COMMITTEE HAS A A GOOD POINT. IT'S SOMETHING THAT A VERY, UM, WE ARE, YOU KNOW, USUALLY WE DON'T DO MORE THAN FOUR FEET AND WE WOULDN'T APPROVE THIS IN ANY CASE. PERSONAL PROBLEMS ARE NOT THE REASON A HUNDRED PERCENT FOR WHY WE WOULD DO THIS, UH, EXEMPTION. THERE IS A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES ON THAT BLOCK ON HER SIDE OF THE STREET, AND I KIND OF WANT THAT, AS YOU KNOW, IT IS INSTALLED ALREADY. I DON'T SEE ACTUALLY A WAY OF MAKING IT LOOK, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER OPTION. I DON'T REALLY SEE ANOTHER SOLUTION FOR A FOUR FOOT. I, I ALSO, I MEAN, AESTHETICALLY, UM, IF I CAN SEE THAT, CONSIDER IT, UM, FROM THE FRONT TO NOT INTERRUPT THE, THE FLOW OF THE HOUSE WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE FRONT. SO IT MATCHES WITH THE BANISTER OF THE, OF THE, THE PORCH. SO FROM THE, FROM THE STREET VIEW, THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. I, I UNDERSTAND THAT. I DON'T THINK IT LOOKS PARTICULARLY OBJECTIONABLE. SOME OF THOSE UP AND DOWN STREET VIEWS WITH THE SIDE FENCE BEING HIRE. YEAH, THOSE ARE REALLY, REALLY STANDS OUT. YEAH. AND MY TROUBLE IN APPROVING THIS IS THAT THE NEXT FENCE IS GONNA BE FIVE FEET AND USE THIS ONE AS AN EXAMPLE AND A PERMANENT APPROVAL HERE. I'M JUST NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SUPPORT. JUST TO REITERATE, I THINK THIS IS AN, IS AN EXTREME CASE, AND THERE'S DOCUMENTATION SUPPORTING THAT EXTREMITY. IT'S NOT JUST SOMEONE GOING, OH, I HATE MY NEIGHBOR. AND, YOU KNOW, AND THEY, THEY HATE ME AND WE CAN'T GET ALONG. THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S BEEN LEGAL ACTION HERE. THERE'S BEEN POLICE INVOLVEMENT. SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY I'M MAKING THAT EXCEPTION ON BEHAVIOR. I THINK, UH, OUR OTHER COMMISSIONER HAVE MADE THE, UH, SUGGESTION ABOUT THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES UP AND DOWN THE STREET. THAT'S THAT, UH, SUGGEST THIS ISN'T COMPLETELY OUT OF LINE WITH WHAT WE CAN FIND HERE. SO I, I THANK YOU. MY MOTION. YEAH. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [Approval of HDRC Meeting Minutes] MOTION TO APPROVE MINUTES. I DON'T HAVE THE DATE. JULY AYE. 17TH. JULY 17TH. JULY 17TH. JULY 17TH. SECOND, UH, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. I THINK WE'RE DONE. MOTION TO ADJOURN PASSES. . THANKS. * 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.