* 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. [00:00:02] I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2019. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ FISH. HERE. HARRIS GARZA. MARTINEZ FLORES. HERE. CARPENTER. HERE. GROUPE. HERE. BOWMAN ZER. HERE. HERE. AND BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN'S PAYMENT, WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT, UM, TRANSLATION SERVICES FOR THE MEETING. SORRY, DID YOU GET THE NEW COMMISSION? I HERE? WELL, I GET THAT THE [Chairman’s Statement] 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 THE CITY MANAGER AND 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. AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION WILL BE GUIDED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR 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 NOT OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE SIGN UP ON THE CITIZENS, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD SHEET. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK. IF YOU'RE 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 IS 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 PERMITS. 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 HAVE HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AT THIS TIME, PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES. UM, THANK YOU. [Announcements (Part 1 of 2)] UM, WE DO HAVE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. UM, THE FIRST IS RIGHT, WE DO HAVE A NEW COMMISSIONER HERE TODAY. UM, SO WE WELCOME GABRIEL VELASQUEZ REPRESENTING COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE. UM, SO O H P HAS A FEW EVENTS THIS WEEK, UM, TO SAY THE LEAST. WE HAVE, UM, THE LIVING HERITAGE SYMPOSIUM, WHICH IS KICKING OFF TONIGHT, UM, WILL MOSTLY TAKE PLACE, UH, TOMORROW THROUGH FRIDAY. UM, THE LIVING HERE SYMPOSIUM IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HOSTED EVERY YEAR FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS, WHERE WE BRING TOGETHER, UM, HERITAGE EXPERTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD, UH, TO TALK ABOUT WAYS THAT, THAT CITIES AND POLICY MAKERS CAN, UM, ADDRESS INTANGIBLE HERITAGE AND CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THEIR LOCAL POLICIES AND PROGRAMS. UM, SO WE'RE EXCITED TO HOST THAT ONCE AGAIN. UM, AND THEN WE ARE ALL HANDS ON DECK ON SATURDAY FOR REHAB ORAMA. UM, SO WE'VE, WE SCHEDULED TWICE FOR RAIN, UM, THIS SPRING AND SO NOW WE'RE HAVING IT, UM, THIS SATURDAY, UM, SEPTEMBER 7TH IN THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, WE ARE DOING WORK ON 16 HOMES, UM, THROUGH HELP OF VOLUNTEER CONTRACTORS, UM, AND MORE THAN 350 VOLUNTEERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP FOR THE EVENT. UM, SO WE ARE THANKFUL FOR ALL OF OUR SPONSORS AND SUPPORTERS FOR THAT EVENT. UM, AND THEN REMINDER FOR EVERYONE, UM, WHO OWNS AN OLDER HOME, AND WE'LL MAKE THIS ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THE BE ITEMS. UM, THE HISTORIC HOMEOWNER FAIR IS COMING UP AS WELL ON SEPTEMBER 21ST AT THE PEARL STABLE. AND SO THE FAIR IS A GREAT RESOURCE FOR ANYONE, UM, WITH AN OLDER HOME, UM, AND SEEKING, UH, RESOURCES SUCH AS, UH, PROFESSIONALS AND CONTRACTORS AND SOLUTIONS, UH, FOR MAINTAINING THEIR PROPERTIES. UM, WE ALSO WILL HAVE AN UPDATE LATER IN THE, UM, IN THE AGENDA, UH, REGARDING THE TOBIN HILL SURVEY. UM, AND SO WE'LL ANNOUNCE THAT LATER ON. ['A' CONSENT AGENDA] UM, WITH THAT, UM, WE CAN LOOK AT THE SCREEN. UM, SO WE HAVE JUST ONE ITEM ON CONSENT, UM, UNDER EIGHT ITEMS, UM, A 1 8 56 [00:05:01] GIMLER. UM, AND WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS AT THIS TIME. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM A ONE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. UH, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU'RE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS 8 56 GIMLER. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. AGENDA [A-2 19-6597 Address/Description: 315 E HOUSTON ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-447 Applicant: Kayla Brooks/Tejas Sign Co. - A-1 Signs Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 1] ITEM NUMBER A TWO H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 19 4 4 7 3 15 EAST HOUSTON. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL SIGNAGE AT THREE 15 EAST HOUSTON. WITHIN THIS REQUEST, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED THE FOLLOWING, ONE. INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN TO READ WEWORK TO BE LOCATED ON THE BALCONY WALL ABOVE THE HISTORIC CREST SIGNAGE. PROPOSED SIGN IS TO FEATURE AN OVERALL WIDTH OF 29 FEET, UH, ONE SIXTH OF AN INCH, AND AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, SEVEN EIGHTHS OF AN INCH FOR A TOTAL SIZE OF 182.5 SQUARE FEET. THIS SIGN WILL FEATURE WHITE ACRYLIC FACES WITH DUAL COLOR PERFORATED VINYL APPLICATIONS. NUMBER TWO, TO INSTALL ONE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN TO READ WEWORK TO BE LOCATED ON THE EAST FACING WALL. THE PROPOSED SIGN IS TO FEATURE AN OVERALL WITH THE 33 FEET FIVE AND ONE QUARTER INCHES IN AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF APPROXIMATELY SEVEN FEET FOR A TOTAL SIZE OF 237 SQUARE FEET. THIS SIGN WILL FEATURE WHITE ACRYLIC FACES WITH DUAL COLOR PERFORATED VINYL APPLICATIONS. THREE ONE. INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTER SIGNED TO READ WEWORK TO BE LOCATED ABOVE THE EAST HOUSTON ENTRANCE CANOPY. THE PROPOSED SIGN IS TO FEATURE AN OVERALL WIDTH OF 13 FEET 11 INCHES, AND AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF TWO FEET 10 INCHES FOR A TOTAL SIZE OF 40.2 SQUARE FEET. THIS SIGN WILL FEATURE WHITE ACRYLIC FACES WITH DUAL COLOR PERFORATED VINYL APPLICATIONS AND FOUR TO INSTALL TEMPORARY VINYL WINDOW APPLICATIONS TO BE INSTALLED IN THE STREET LEVEL STOREFRONT SYSTEM. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH FOUR WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT ALL PROPOSED SIGNAGE BE MODIFIED TO FEATURE EITHER HALO OR INDIRECT LIGHTING AS TO NOT PRODUCE AN INTERNAL GLOWING CABINET. TWO, THAT THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE FACING SOUTH BE RELOCATED TO THE PENTHOUSE WALL WHERE IT WILL NOT INTERFERE OR NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE HISTORIC CREST SIGNAGE. THREE. THAT ALL TEMPORARY SIGNAGE BE REMOVED AT THE TIME OF INSTALLATION OF PERMANENT SIGNAGE. UM, I WILL NOTE I DON'T BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE. THE APPLICANT NOTED VIA EMAIL EARLIER TODAY THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE TO ATTEND TODAY'S HEARING. WE'LL ALSO NOTE THAT THE 60 DAY REVIEW PERIOD ENDS ON SEPTEMBER THE 28TH. UM, SO THERE IS ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS TO BE REVIEWED WITH AN APPLICANT PRESENT, UM, PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE 60 DAY, 60 DAY REVIEW PERIOD. COMMISSIONERS, WE DO HAVE A CITIZEN TO BE HEARD FOR THIS CASE. VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, 91 18 FAIRLAND REPRESENTING CONSERVATION SOCIETY, THE SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS WITH THE STAFF. RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE FOR THREE 15 EAST HOUSTON. AS STATED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THE SIGNAGE LIGHTING SHOULD EITHER BE HALO OR INDIRECT LIGHT AND NOT AN INTERNAL GLOWING CABINET. THE NEW LIGHTING SHOULD ALSO BE DESIGNED IN A WAY THAT IT IS NOT COMPETE WITH A HISTORIC CREST SIGN. THANK YOU. SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY PRESIDENT PETTY ZZ. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. I THINK LAST WEEK THE APPLICANT WAS NOT HERE EITHER. DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE INTENTIONS TO COME? I WOULD ASSUME THE APPLICANT JUST TOLD ME TODAY THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ATTEND UM, UM, AT THE COMMISSION'S DISCRETION IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ACTION TODAY. THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY CONVERSATIONS ON THE STIPULATIONS. THEY JUST NOTED THAT THE STIPULATIONS WERE FORWARDED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD TAKE ACTION ON, ON THIS WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND, UM, THE APPLICANT WISHES TO FEEL THEY CAN GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR THEY COULD SUBMIT A REVISED APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION. MR. CHAIRMAN, I DON'T FORESEE [00:10:01] ANYTHING THAT WOULD, UH, YOU KNOW, CHANGE MY OPINION ABOUT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS AND SO I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAYYY. MOTION PASSES. [A-3 19-6613 Address/Description: 3310 SAN PEDRO AVE HDRC Case No.: 2019-474 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: George Lowery/GLA Permitting Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 1] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER A THREE H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 19 2 OR EXCUSE ME, 4 74 33 10 SAN PEDRO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE EXISTING FREESTANDING POLE SIGN WITH THE NEW DUAL FACE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED ILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGN AT 33 10. SAN PEDRO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REPLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING SIGN WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. ONE THAT THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT SIGN FEATURE A SIMPLER MASSING, PREFERABLY WITH ONLY ONE MONUMENT ELEMENT AND TWO, THAT THE PROPOSED HEIGHT BE REDUCED TO NOT EXCEED SIX FEET IN HEIGHT PER THE GUIDELINES. NOW WE'LL NOTE THERE IS A LETTER IN YOUR PACKETS FROM, UM, MONTE VISTA CITIZENS TO BE HEARD ON THIS YOU, BUT WE WILL WANT TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FIRST. THAT'S RIGHT. I'M SORRY. THE APPLICANT HERE. PLEASE. I APOLOGIZE THEN WE CAN, UM, HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD AT THIS TIME. I'M TONY GARCIA. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN AND, AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST ATCH HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION AS WELL AS A MEMBER OF ITS ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. AS NOTED IN THE CINDY'S FINDINGS, SEE, THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT SIGN DOES EXCEED WHAT IS RECOMMENDED BY THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES WITH REGARDS TO THE NUMBER AND SIZE OF THE SIGNS ON THE LOT. IN ADDITION, THE CITY'S FINDINGS D INDICATE THAT THE CURRENT DESIGN IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. SO WE SEE THIS APPLICATION SOMEWHAT PROBLEMATIC. WE BELIEVE THE PROPOSED SIGN DESIGN DESPITE THE STIPULATIONS, REQUIRE FURTHER WORK BEFORE IT IS APPROVED. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE A R C BELIEVES THAT THE SIGNS MASSING AND POSSIBLE HEIGHT RESTRICTION COULD CREATE A TRAFFIC HAZARD BY INCREASING SIGHT LINE OBSTRUCTION AT THE INTERSECTION OF SAN PEDRO AND HILDERBRAND. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE COMMISSION TO DENY THE APPLICATION OR AT LEAST REQUEST THE APPLICANT TO MEET WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP A SIGNED DESIGN THAT WOULD ADDRESS OUR SAFETY CONCERNS AND MEET THE INTENT OF THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. EDWARD, WHEN IS ACTION DUE ON THIS ITEM? OCTOBER 13TH. AYE I MOVE TO CONTINUE? SECOND MOTION AND SECOND TO CONTINUE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. [A-4 19-6605 Address/Description: 849 E COMMERCE ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-477 RIO District: RIO-3 Applicant: Ashley Schriedel/Alamo Sign Solutions Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 1] AGENDA ITEM A FOUR H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 19 4 77 8 49 EAST COMMERCE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL A NUMBER OF SIGNS AND OTHER ELEMENTS AT THE LAGOON LEVEL WITHIN THE RIVER CENTER MALL. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PATIO WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS THAT ALL SIGNAGE BE ELIMINATED FROM THE PATIO. AND TWO, THAT THE A, THAT THE PATIO FEATURE STONE CLADDING TO MATCH THAT OF THE EXISTING RIVER AND LAGOON LEVEL ELEMENTS FOR ITEMS TWO THROUGH SIX. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH SIX. SIGNAGE BASED ON FINDINGS D THROUGH H. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALL ONE SIGN FEATURING REVERSE LIT CHANNEL LETTERS THAT DOES NOT EXCEED EIGHT SQUARE FEET FOR ITEM SEVEN AND EIGHT. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE PROPOSED MENU BOARD BE INSTALLED IN A TWO BY TWO CASE AND NOT FEATURE ANY SIGNAGE OF BRANDING. AND TWO, THAT THE PROPOSED OVERHEAD LIGHT BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE ARCADE AND NOT FEATURE ANY SIGNAGE. AND FOR ITEM NINE, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF, OF THE INSTALLATION OF A BEACH CHAIR AT THE RIGHT OF WAY. THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. GOOD EVENING, JAMES ALFARO [00:15:01] ALAMO SIGN SOLUTIONS. SO HAVE YOU OR YOUR CLIENT, UH, REVIEWED THE STAFF COMMENTS ON THIS CASE WE HAVE, SIR. UM, SO ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE STIPULATIONS? WELL, UM, OBVIOUSLY AS, AS THE APPLICANT AND THE REPRESENTATIVE OF, OF THE CUSTOMER, WE WOULD, WE'D LIKE TO GET SOME MORE INFORMATION ON AS TO WHY THE STAFF MADE SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS AND, AND TO GET SOME MORE CLARIFICATION, UH, IF WE CAN TO, UM, PROVIDE A MORE CLEAR EXPLANATION TO OUR CUSTOMER. MR. HALL, DO YOU THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO HERE OR DO YOU THINK A D R C IS IN ORDER TO DISCUSS THIS IN FURTHER? UH, PREFERABLY HERE. UM, THE APPLICANTS WERE SENT STAFF'S FINDINGS LAST WEDNESDAY, UM, WHICH NOTE, UH, STAFF DOESN'T FIND EACH OF THE REQUESTED ITEMS TO BE APPROPRIATE. UM, SO IT MAY BE BEST TO TRY TO GO THROUGH THOSE ITEM BY ITEM, UM, WHILE WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY HERE. OKAY. SO, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE SIGNAGE ON THE PATIO, UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IS THE PATIO SOMETHING SIMILAR THAT WE ALREADY HAD APPROVED FOR THE RIVER CINEMA? THE STIPULATION FOR THE PATIO WAS THAT IT FEATURE MATERIALS THAT ARE COMPARABLE TO THOSE FOUND CURRENTLY, UM, AT THIS LEVEL, WHICH IS ALL FO STONE OR LIMESTONE VENEER. UM, THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED A TRX COMPOSITE DECKING THAT'S TO APPEAR AS WOOD. UH, SO STAFF FINDS THAT TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL. UM, THAT WAS ISSUED, UH, ON OCTOBER, EXCUSE ME, THAT WAS ISSUED LAST, UH, LAST WINTER. UM, IN REGARDS TO SIGNAGE, ESSENTIALLY I CAN SUMMARIZE, UM, THE PREVIOUS MASTER SIGNAGE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED FOR THE MALL IN 2012 NOTES THAT SIGNAGE IS TO BE CONSISTENTLY PLACED. UM, SO ABOVE THE STOREFRONT SYSTEM, MORE OR LESS WHERE BAR OR GRILL IS NOTED IN THE, THE RENDERING THAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW. UM, AND THE U D C NOTES THAT SIGNAGE AT THE RIVER LEVEL SHOULDN'T EXCEED EIGHT SQUARE FEET. UM, WHEN THE MASTER SIGNAGE PLAN FOR THE MALL WAS APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION SIZES AT THE LAGOON LEVEL WERE NOTED AS EIGHT SQUARE FEET. UM, SO ESSENTIALLY THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED SIGNAGE THAT FAR EXCEEDS EIGHT SQUARE FEET, INCLUDING THE BAR AND GRILL LAND SHARKS, UM, THE PATIO SIGNAGE, THE MENU BOARD IS INAPPROPRIATELY SCALED AND DESIGNED. UM, AND THEN, UM, THE U D C PROHIBITS ANY TYPE OF ADVERTISING ON STREET FURNITURE. UM, THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE, UM, THE PLACEMENT OF THE BEACH CHAIR THAT'S LOCATED WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. UH, SO ESSENTIALLY, UM, A, A SUMMARY OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, IS, UH, STONE CLADDING FOR THE DECK THAT ALL SIGNAGE BE REMOVED FOR THE, FROM THE DECK. THEN ONLY ONE SIGN THAT'S EIGHT SQUARE FEET BE INSTALLED ABOVE THE STOREFRONT SYSTEM, UM, THAT THE PROPOSED MENU BOARD BE INSTALLED IN A TWO BY TWO CASE. UM, THAT'S TWO FEET SQUARE CASE AND THAT THE, UM, BEACH CHAIR BE REMOVED. UH, THERE'S A FEW OTHER SIGNS THAT ARE, THAT WERE POSTED, INCLUDING THIS FINS UP SAN ANTONIO NEON SIGN AND THIS LARGE, UH, CIRCULAR SIGN, THE APPLICANTS NOTED THAT THOSE WON'T BE ON THE EXTERIOR AND WON'T BE WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE, UM, 10 FEET OF ANY FENESTRATION. SO THERE'S NO NEED FOR THE COMMISSION TO TAKE ACTION ON THESE. SO TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WAS YOUR, UH, CLIENT PROVIDED A, A COPY OF THE MASTER SIGNAGE, UH, STIPULATIONS AS PART OF THEIR LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE LANDLORD? NOT FROM 2012. I DON'T BELIEVE THEY WERE. NO SIR. NO. SO IT'S 2012 IT WAS APPROVED. IT IS STILL VALID. UM, EVERY TENANT THAT HAS BEEN IN THE RIVER CINEMA MALL LATELY, I MEAN WE'VE SEEN MANY CASES THEY'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF OR THE LEASING OFFICE TO HAVE A, A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. I THINK STAFF HAS IT RIGHT ON A LOT OF THESE STIPULA. UM, DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE BASED ON THE STIPULATIONS, WOULD YOU ACCEPT THESE STIPULATIONS AND WELL, I'D, I'D LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK TO MY CUSTOMER AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT THESE STIPULATIONS ARE AND THE AMOUNT OF LETTERS THAT ARE BEING DENIED AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND MAYBE COME BACK AND READDRESS THE COMMISSION. [00:20:02] THAT WOULD BE A WITHDRAWAL FROM YOU. WE DON'T TAKE ANY ACTION AND YOU CAN COME BACK. UH, JUST WANT TO CLARIFY IF THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW AND THEN SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION OR IF THE APPLICANT WOULD SIMPLY LIKE TO HAVE THIS RESET TO THE SEPTEMBER 18TH HEARING. UM, LET'S RESET IT TO SEPTEMBER 18TH. SO I WOULD MOVE TO CONTINUE SECOND MOTION AND SECOND TO CONTINUE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. YOU, UM, COMMISSIONERS THAT COMPLETES THE A ADAMS. WE HAVE ABOUT FOUR MINUTES UNTIL WE CAN BEGIN, UH, DISCUSSION ABOUT THE BEE ITEMS. UM, SO I SUGGEST WE JUST TAKE A QUICK BREAK. I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE [Announcements (Part 2 of 2)] HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2019. UM, WE JUST DID ROLL CALL ABOUT 20 MINUTES AGO, SO WE WILL PROCEED, UM, WITH ANNOUNCEMENTS. UM, TRANSLATION SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE MEETING AND THERE'S A QUICK VIDEO. WELL, I GET THAT A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. UM, I'LL SKIP ALL THE ONES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, BUT I DO WANT TO GIVE ANOTHER, UM, PLUG FOR THE HISTORIC HOMEOWNER AFFAIRS SINCE WE DO HAVE A LOT OF HISTORIC HOMEOWNERS IN THE AUDIENCE. UM, THAT IS AN ANNUAL EVENT TAKING PLACE ON SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 21ST AT THE PEARL STABLE. THERE'S MORE INFORMATION ON OUR WEBSITE, SA PRESERVATION.COM. UM, NEXT ON THE AGENDA I WANNA BRING UP, UM, UH, SCOUTS A PRO PROGRAM MANAGER, JENNY HAY, UM, TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE TOBIN HILL SURVEY INITIATIVE. I'M SORRY, THAT IS NO LONGER HAPPENING. UM, SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD, UM, WITH THE ITEMS YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN. UM, WE HAVE CONSENT ITEMS ON THE B AGENDA. UM, B 17 IS INCLUDED IN THAT IT WAS POSTED THAT WAY. UM, SO IT'S B 17 AND ITEMS B ONE THROUGH B SEVEN. I'M SORRY. BEFORE WE DO THAT, WE HAVE A, [Citizens to be Heard] WE HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD ON GENERAL ITEMS AND SO WE WILL DO THOSE FIRST. UM, WILLIAM CARSON. GOOD AFTERNOON. WILLIAM CARSON WITH THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. UH, IN THE INTEREST OF EVERYONE'S TIME, UM, WE'VE CONSOLIDATED OUR COMMENTS AS FOLLOWS. WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE FOLLOWING, UH, CASE NUMBER 4 8 5 9 12 9 14 AND NINE 16 EAST CROCKETT STREET. UH, WE SUPPORT AS PRESENTED AND SUPPORT O HP'S RECOMMENDATIONS. WE ALSO SUPPORT CASE NUMBER 4 7 9 4 8 31 BURLESON STREET, UH, ALSO WITH O H P RECOMMENDATIONS. UM, WE DO NOT SUPPORT AT THIS TIME. CASE NUMBER FOUR, UH, 20 19 4 8 0 FOR FOUR 15 NORTH MESQUITE 1 0 5, 1 0 7, 1 0 9 1 11, AND ONE 13 BROWN STREET. UH, 'CAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT, IT DOES REQUIRE A PRESENTATION AT THE FULL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING PER OUR GUIDELINES. AS THE PROJECT CURRENTLY STANDS, WE HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE PROJECT'S HEIGHT AS IT RELATES TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, SPECIFICALLY THE STRUCTURE ON NORTH MESQUITE STREET AND THE MASSING ALONG BROWN STREET. UH, END ACT DOES SUPPORT O H P RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, SO BACK TO THE SCREEN ON ITEM B FIVE, WE DO HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD, SO THAT'LL BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY AND WE'LL MARK IT THAT WAY. YOU AND SO UP FOR, UM, ['B' ITEMS CONSENT AGENDA] APPROVAL ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM B 17 AND ITEMS B ONE THROUGH B SIX OR B FOUR AND THEN B SIX AND B SEVEN. MR. CHAIRMAN, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT TO ITEMS B ONE THROUGH B FOUR B SIX AND B 17 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND. DID WE GET ALL OF THOSE? GET B SEVEN B 17 B ONE THROUGH B FOUR AND THEN SIX AND SEVEN. ALRIGHT, PLEASE INCLUDE B SEVEN THEN IN THAT, SO B ONE THROUGH B FOUR, B SIX, B SEVEN, AND B 17 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES, YOUR HONOR, THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS 1323 FULTON AVENUE, 2 0 4 WEST CRAIG, 2 54 NORTH 50 5800 ENRIQUE BARRERA, 76 27 WEST MILITARY, NINE 12 AND NINE 16 EAST CROCKETT AND 9 58 EAST MISSILE TOE. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO [00:25:01] STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. IF YOU HAVE NOT YET RETURNED THE PUBLIC NOTICE, YARD SIGN PLACED ON YOUR PROPERTY, PLEASE DO SO AT THE O H P COUNTER ON THE FIRST FLOOR. OKAY, NOW LET'S LOOK AT THE SCREEN AGAIN. UM, CAN YOU PULL UP THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS? THERE'S A COUPLE OF UPDATES. UM, SO ITEM B 10, UH, NINE 13 NORTH OLIVE HAS BEEN POSTPONED BY THE APPLICANT. IT'LL BE HEARD ON, UH, SEPTEMBER 18TH. WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. NOBODY SIGNED IN FOR THAT ITEM. UM, SAME WITH ITEM B 13 3 23 LEE STREET. UM, THAT HAS ALSO BEEN POSTPONED BY THE APPLICANT. WE DON'T HAVE ANY CITIZENS SIGNED UP FOR THAT ITEM AS WELL, SO WE CAN MOVE TO ITEM B [ B-5 19-6593 Address/Description: 831 BURLESON ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-479 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Dianet Lopez Daniel/Delafield Investments, LLC Request: Porch modifications, side fenestration modifications City Council Dist.: 2] FIVE. OKAY, SO ITEM B FIVE A C C CASE NUMBER 20 19 4 7 9 8 31 BURLESON. THIS CASE WAS PULLED FOR CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. I'M THE FIRST IS MONICA SABINO. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. UM, MY NAME IS MONICA SAVINO. I'M AT 1120 EAST CROCKETT STREET AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF A SMALL GROUP OF RESIDENTS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. COUPLE OF THEM ARE HERE WITH US TODAY. UH, WE ALSO SUBMITTED AN EMAIL TO YOU GUYS, UM, OUTLINING SOME TECHNICAL TOPICS ON THIS PROPERTY. UM, BUT, UH, A LARGER CONCERN THAT I'D WANNA SPEAK TO TODAY IS THE PROCESS BY WHICH THIS PRO PROJECT HAS COME PIECEMEAL TO THE COMMISSION AND ALSO TO O H P OVER THE PAST FOUR MONTHS. THE CONCERN, UM, IS THAT THIS IS A WONDERFUL HOUSE. I KNOW THE APPLICANTS HERE TODAY AND WE, UM, ARE REALLY PLEASED THAT THEY'VE TAKEN ON SUCH A BIG MONUMENTAL TASK. THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL HOUSE AND WE WANT IT TO BE THE BEST IT CAN BE. UM, BUT IT RE REQUIRES A COMPLETE REHAB. AND EVEN THOUGH THE PROJECT HAS GONE TO O H P AND HT RT C SEVEN H D R C, SEVERAL TIMES IN BITS AND PIECES FOR WINDOW HERE, DOOR THERE IN JUNE, JULY, AUGUST AND TODAY, UM, UH, OUR CONCERN IS THAT THE ELEMENTS, THE ARCHITECTURE ELEMENTS ARE NOT BEING COORDINATED AS WELL AS THEY COULD BE CONSIDERING THIS IS SUCH A LARGE, EXTENSIVE PROJECT. FOR EXAMPLE, UM, THE, THIS METHOD OF PURSUING APPROVALS FOR THE SCOPE OF THE WORK HAS HAMPERED THE ABILITY TO REALLY REVIEW THE PROJECT IN ITS ENTIRE SCOPE. ITEMS HAVE BEEN MISSING IN THE LARGEST STORY OF THE HISTORIC HOUSE. THE F FOLK. VICTORIAN IS REALLY NEVER IN FOCUS. A THOROUGH REVIEW AND COORDINATION OF NEW AND EXISTING WINDOWS IS LACKING. WINDOWS, FOR EXAMPLE, WINDOWS ON THE NORTH FACE HAVE NEVER BEEN ADDRESSED, BUT ON THE DRAWING THEY SHOW THEY'LL BE RE REPLACED. UM, THE PIECEMEAL REVIEW REALLY DOESN'T LET US CONSIDER WHAT WE BELIEVE IS A NON-CONFORMING FRONT ADDITION AND A ROOF, UM, REQUESTED ROOFING. UM, WHAT'S MISSING IS THAT PRE 1924, THIS HOUSE WAS A DUPLEX. THERE WAS A SEPARATE ENTRYWAY AND THEN THERE WAS THIS ADDITION PUT ON AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING WE WERE GIVEN, UM, APPROVAL WAS GIVEN TO REMOVE ONE OF THE DUPLEX ENTRYWAYS AS WELL AS SOME OTHER ITEMS WITHOUT REALLY CONSIDERING THE DUPLEX ADDITION OF THIS, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS A NON-CONFORMING AND CONSISTENT VOLUME ON THE FRONT. TODAY WE'RE HERE, UM, TO REVIEW, UM, A NEW ROOF AND A PORCH. THE ROOF, IF YOU GO THROUGH THE DRAWINGS, UM, THE NOTATIONS AREN'T CORRECT. UM, YOU REALLY CAN'T DO A SIX AND 12 ROOF OVER THE PORCH, UM, UNLESS YOU DO SOME OTHER THINGS, THE ELEVATIONS AREN'T COORDINATED. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS IS MORE ABOUT THE PROCESS OF A PIECEMEAL APPLICATION RATHER THAN THE BENEFIT OF LOOKING, LOOKING AT IT IN THE LARGER PICTURE, UM, OUR CONCERN IS THAT MAINTAINING THE FRONT ADDITION DETRACTS FROM THE CHARACTER OF THAT ORIGINAL FOLK VICTORIAN. BY THE TIME YOU REMOVE ALL THE ENTRYWAYS, IT NO LONGER LOOKS LIKE THE FOLK. VICTORIAN SCALE IS DIFFERENT PROPORTION COMPOSITION OF THE FOLK VICTORIAN IS LOST. THANK YOU. UM, WILLIAM CARSON HAS SIGNED IN FOR THIS ITEM AS WELL. DID YOU WANNA SPEAK AGAIN, WILLIAM? SO YOUR PREVIOUS COMMENTS COVERED IT. OKAY. SO THAT'S ALL WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE, PLEASE. UM, MY NAME IS DENETTE. UH, THERE, I DO REALIZE THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED THINGS [00:30:01] IN BITS AND BITS AND PIECES. UM, THE REASON WHY THIS IS A HUGE PROJECT, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURES. UM, SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH ON WHAT WE CAN DO. WE'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THIS HOME. UM, BUT AS IT WAS STATED, UM, BY, UM, THE LADY THAT SPOKE BEFORE ME, UM, THIS HOUSE WAS TURNED INTO, WE THOUGHT IT WAS MAYBE, UH, A THREE FAMILY HOME JUST BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY DOORS, SO MANY WINDOWS. UM, THEY DID ADD AN ADDITION, UH, WHICH, UM, WHEN THEY ADDED THE ADDITION, THE ROOF, IT'S RIGHT SIDE OF THE HOUSE, UM, WAS NOT DONE PROPERLY. UM, THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE, 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT PLANNING TO REPLACE THE ROOF. THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS AN EXTENSION OF THE PORCH AND IN THE CORNER WHERE THE ROOF MEETS, IT'LL BE LIKE A CURVED, UH, ROOF, WHICH, UM, STAFF SAID THAT THAT WOULD BE OKAY BECAUSE ORIGINALLY THIS HOUSE HAD A WRAPAROUND PORCH. UM, SO THEY COULD SUPPORT THAT. UM, WITH THE WINDOWS WE ARE, AS YOU CAN PROBABLY SEE IN THE PICTURES, THERE ARE NEW WINDOWS THAT WERE ADDED. THEN THERE'S SOME EXISTING WINDOWS. UM, IN ORDER FOR ALL OF THE WINDOWS TO MATCH, WE WANTED TO REPLACE ALL THE WINDOWS WITH, UM, ALL WOOD CLAD WINDOWS, UM, WHICH WAS ALSO RECOMMENDED BY STAFF THAT WE DO. MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. DO YOU ALL CONSIDER THE ADDITION, UH, TO THE FRONT THERE AS HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT AT TELLING THE STORY OF ALTERATION OVER TIME? OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DEMO DEMOED WITHOUT, UM, A PROBLEM? I DIDN'T CATCH THE LAST PART OF THAT QUESTION. DIS DISREGARD THAT LAST, LAST PORTION. DO YOU CONSIDER THE ADDITION HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT? UM, NO, WE DON'T. UM, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, JUST NOT A REQUIREMENT TO REMOVE A BAD ADDITION. AND SO THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO WORK WITH IT SINCE IT'S BEEN THERE. UM, OBVIOUSLY BASED ON THE SANBORNS, WE KNOW IT WAS AN ADDITION AND THAT THIS WAS ORIGINALLY, UM, A WRAPAROUND PORCH. AND SO THIS WAS ONCE THE AREA THAT THE PORCH WOULD'VE, UH, TAKEN UP. YEAH, WE CAN SEE THERE. UM, SO WE HAVE MADE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS THAT, UM, DISCOURAGE, UM, A FULL WIDTH PORT PORCH THAT WOULD SORT OF DISGUISE THAT HISTORY. AND SO WE HAVE PURVIEW OVER, OVER FUTURE CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY AND MAKING SURE THAT THOSE ARE THE MOST APPROPRIATE. BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO RESTORE A HISTORICAL CONDITION. STAFF PULL UP THE PICTURE OF THE WINDOW AND DOOR THEY WANNA REMOVE AND REPLACE WITH THE DOOR WEST SIDE. THAT'S WHERE MY CONFUSE IS. THERE'S ANOTHER WINDOW. IS THAT CORRECT? UM, YEAH, THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU, THERE'S UM, QUITE A BIT OF, THERE'S, THAT WINDOW WAS ALREADY APPROVED. UM, IT'S JUST IN A CORNER OF THE HOUSE. SO YEAH, THERE WERE, UH, TWO ITEMS THAT WERE REFERRED FROM THE LAST, UH, H D R C HEARING TO A D R C SITE VISIT. UM, THE THREE WINDOWS THAT YOU SEE HERE ARE ACTUALLY ONE WINDOW NEXT TO TWO GANGED WINDOWS RATHER THAN THREE GANGED WINDOWS. UM, THE COM, THE D R C MEMBERS CONFERRED THAT, UH, THE SECOND SET, THE GANG SET WAS ELIGIBLE FOR REMOVAL AS THEY DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S A NON, THAT IT'S A HISTORIC FEATURE. AND THEN THIS DOOR RIGHT HERE AS WELL, UM, IT'S BEING REQUESTED TO BE RELOCATED WHERE THOSE TWO WINDOWS WOULD BE REMOVED AND STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THAT WITH THE D R C UH, COMMENTS. AND THAT'S ITEM NUMBER TWO, CORRECT? I BELIEVE SO. WHAT'S GONNA GO IN PLACE OF THAT DOOR THAT'S GONNA BE REMOVED? NOTHING. IT WOULD JUST BE SIDING. I, I UNDERSTAND, UM, THE CONCERNS FROM THE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. I KNOW THIS IS A PROJECT THAT HAS KIND OF UNFOLDED OVER TIME. UH, I AGREE WITH STAFF'S FINDINGS AND AT THIS TIME I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS [00:35:01] ONE THROUGH THREE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAYYY PASSES. THANK YOU. [B-8 19-6633 Address/Description: 214 LOTUS ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-422 Applicant: Office of Historic Preservation Request: Finding of Historic Significance City Council Dist.: 1] AGENDA ITEM B EIGHT H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 19 422 2 14 LOTUS STREET. THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS REQUESTING A FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT TWO 14. LOTUS 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 TWO 14 LOTUS STREET TO THE ZONING COMMISSION AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH G. THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING, THIS WAS SENT TO A SITE VISIT BY THE D R C I WAS, UH, PART OF THAT, UH, ON SITE REVIEW AND, UH, I'LL GIVE MY COMMENTS AND THEN THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS CAN ADD TO IT. UM, THE BUILDING HAS BEEN ADDED ONTO SEVERAL TIMES IN THE REAR, UH, AND THEY ARE PRETTY MUCH IN, UH, BAD CONDITION. UH, THE FRONT PART OF THE HOUSE THAT YOU SEE HERE, THE PORCH, THE COLUMNS, THE, THE ROOF LINE, UM, THE DOORS AND WINDOWS, UM, ALL APPEAR TO BE ORIGINAL AND DURABLE. UH, YES, THE, THE HOUSE DOES NEED SOME, UH, WORK, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF EXISTING, UM, HISTORIC FABRIC HERE THAT, UH, I THINK REINFORCES, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS IN VERY POOR CONDITION. UH, INTERIORS OF THE FRONT PART OF THE HOUSE, UH, APPEARS TO HAVE THE MAJORITY OF ITS ORIGINAL WOODWORK, UH, IN A CONDITION THAT COULD BE RESTORED. YEP, I WAS, UM, PRESENT TOO. UM, I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE DID SEND IT TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE WAS ALSO BECAUSE THERE HAD BEEN A RECENT LISTING FOR SALE AND WE HAD THE PICTURES IN OUR CASE, AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME PROPERTY AS THE PICTURES WERE SHOWN AS A HOME THAT WERE LIVABLE. UM, I, UH, AGREED WITH MY COMMISSIONER'S COMMENT. UM, WE WERE THERE TO ASSESS NOT SO MUCH A PROPERTY'S CONDITION, WHICH REALLY, UM, AGREE WITH THE, THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MAIN PROPERTY. UM, THERE HAS BEEN MANY ADDITIONS, WHICH ARE NOT EVEN ON THE SANDBORN MAP, SO THEY WOULD BE, IF THIS BECOMES A LANDMARK, WE MADE SURE THE APPLICANT KNOWS THAT THESE CAN BE, UM, DEMOLISHED IF I SOMETHING THAT THEY COULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR IN THE BACK, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, WHICH WAS YES, STRUCTURALLY NOT, UM, IN A VERY GOOD CONDITION. BUT OVERALL, THE MAIN HOUSE AND WHAT'S WAS THERE AND SHOWN ON THE SANDBORN WRAP IS I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE WITH STAFF COMMENTS ON, ON A HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. UM, COMMISSIONERS, WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF CITIZENS TO BE HEARD AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. UM, SO WE HAVE CITIZENS AT THIS TIME, UH, VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, 91 18 FAIRLAND SAN ANTONIO. THREE MONTHS AGO, THE SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONTACTED THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE HOME AT TWO 14 LOTUS. BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT THE PROPERTY HAD ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE, WE ALSO KNEW THAT THE BUILDING HAD BEEN MARKETED WITHIN THE LAST YEAR AS A HISTORIC PROPERTY IN AN AREA WITH A VIBRANT TRADITION OF REUSE AND REHABILITATION. THE SALE PRICE APPEARED CONSISTENT WITH THAT OF OTHER PRESERVATION PROJECTS IN THE COMMUNITY. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS THAT THE HOME AT TWO 14 LOTUS MEETS THREE OF THE CRITERIA REQUIRED IN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR DESIGNATION AS A HISTORIC [00:40:01] LANDMARK. FIRST IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF A QUEEN AND STYLE VICTORIAN HOME WITH ITS CLA PORCH SIDING, DISTINCTIVE ROOF LINE AND DECORATIVE PORCH ADDITIONS TO THE HOUSE DO NOT DETRACT FROM THE COLUMN FRONT PORCH, LARGE ENTRANCE AND GABLE TO FACADE. SECOND, THE HOUSE IS ASSOCIATED WITH ADOLF BARNETT FAMILY, FOR WHOM IT WAS BUILT IN 1909. THE WAR NETS WERE DESCENDED FROM THE ORIGINAL ALSATIAN SETTLERS OF CASTROVILLE AND CONTINUE TO BE IN A PRESENCE IN SAN ANTONIO. THIRDLY, THE BUILDING PROVIDES A CONNECTION TO THE EARLIEST HISTORY OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, HAVING HELPED SET THE STANDARD FOR HOUSING WHEN IT WAS CONSTRUCTED. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY BY THE PRESIDENT PATTY ZZ RE, RO EGRIN. HI, I'M CHERISE RO EGRIN, 1 3 3 DIVINE STREET. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I'VE LIVED IN LAVACCA SINCE, UM, WELL SINCE IN 2002. UM, BUT WE PURCHASED A HOUSE ON DIVINE STREET IN 2004, UM, BEFORE WE PURCHASED THAT HOUSE. UM, OTHER BUYERS WANTED TO DEMOLISH IT BECAUSE IT WAS IN SUCH BAD CONDITION, AND IF YOU HAD SEEN IT, YOU WOULD KNOW WHY. UM, FORTUNATELY THAT PROPERTY HAD VERY RECENTLY BEEN DECLARED HISTORIC, SO THEY COULDN'T DEMOLISH IT. AND SO WE ENDED UP BUYING IT AND HAVE VERY SLOWLY OVER THE LAST 15 YEARS WORKED ON IT. SO I SAY ALL THAT TO LET YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S INVOLVED IN REHABBING A HOUSE THAT OTHERS WOULD PREFER TO TEAR DOWN THE NETTE HOUSE AT TWO 14. LOTUS IS JUST OUTSIDE THE LAVA HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND YOU KNOW, FROM YOUR DOCUMENTS THAT THIS HOUSE BUILT BY ADA FORNET HAS MANY ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS THAT ARE VERY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EARLY 19 HUNDREDS. AND WHEN IT WAS LISTED IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR, AS YOU SAW FROM THE PHOTOS, UM, IT HAD RECENTLY BEEN REHABBED, UM, AND WAS IN, IN VERY LIVABLE CONDITION. THE, THERE WERE LARGE PECAN TREES THAT SHADED THE HOUSE. UH, UNFORTUNATELY THOSE PECAN TREES HAVE SINCE BEEN, UH, TORN OUT, AND I THINK THERE WAS SOME DAMAGE TO THE ROOF AFTER THE FACT BECAUSE OUR, WE WALK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD QUITE A LOT. WE KNOW WHAT THE HOUSES LOOK LIKE, WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND THE ROOF WAS NOT DAMAGED BEFORE, BUT WAS DAMAGED AFTERWARDS. UNFORTUNATELY, THE HOUSES OF LAVACCA HAVE A STORY TO TELL, AND TWO 14, LOTUS IS NO EXCEPTION. UH, YOU HEARD ABOUT THE, UM, THE BUILDER, THE ARCHITECTURE REALLY REFLECTS THE BIRTH OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THOSE HOUSES IN THIS COMMUNITY WERE JUST STARTING AT THAT TIME IN AROUND 1908. UM, LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BELIEVES IT DESERVES LANDMARK DE DESIGNATION, UM, WHICH WOULD SUPPORT THE HISTORY OF OUR COMMUNITY AND ENRICH OUR COMMUNITY. UH, TO LOSE THE HOUSE WOULD BE TO LOSE THE STORY THAT HAS EVOLVED THERE OVER THE PAST 110 YEARS. UM, SINCE ADOLF, HIS WIFE, FRIEDA AND THEIR TWO SURVIVING CHILDREN MOVED THERE IN 1909 AS A BRAND NEW HOME. IT'S HAD MANY FAMILIES LIVE THERE OVER THE YEARS. WE FOUND A LOT OF INFORMATION, WHICH YOU'VE HAD IN YOUR PACKETS UP TO ABOUT 1940. UM, AS YOU CAN GUESS, THIS IS SOMETHING FOR THOSE OF US THAT LIVE IN LAVACCA. WE LOVE TO HEAR THE STORIES OF THE PEOPLE, UM, THAT LIVE THERE. SO FOR THAT REASON, LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, WOULD SUPPORT HISTORIC DESIGNATION. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE DO SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENTS. UM, WE'VE PARTICULARLY SUPPORTED, UM, PROPERTIES GOING UP ON, ON THE CORRIDORS. WE SUPPORT HIGHER DENSITY ON THE CORRIDORS. WE SUPPORT INFILL IN ALREADY VACANT LOTS. WHAT WE DON'T WANNA DO IS TO CREATE MORE VACANT LOTS IN THIS HISTORIC AREA. UH, SO WE ASK YOU TO, UH, PLEASE SUPPORT THE O HP'S RECOMMENDATION FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE. SO NOW WE CAN HEAR FROM MR. GALLEGOS, THE PROPERTY OWNERS' REPRESENTATIVE. CAN STAFF JUST PULL UP THIS SLIDE WITH THE THREE CRITERIA FOR REEVALUATION FINDINGS? MR. CHAIRMAN, HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JOSE GALLEGOS. I RESIDE AT TWO 14 WEST ACADEMY SAN ANTONIO, 7 8 2 2 6. UH, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO COMPLIMENT, UH, THE CASE MANAGER WITH A HISTORIC, UH, PRESERVATION, UH, DEPARTMENT, UH, MS. ANDERSON FOR, UH, HER VERY PROFESSIONAL AND ACCOMMODATING, UH, WAY IN WHICH SHE DEALT, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, OR WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND MYSELF. UH, I THINK FOR TOO LONG WE DO NOT RECOGNIZE THE EFFORTS OF STAFF AND THE, THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT THEY PUT INTO, UH, UH, TO A PROPERTY [00:45:01] OR TO A CASE. SO, AGAIN, UH, PUBLICLY THANK YOU MS. ANDERSON, FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR ATTENTION TO OUR, OUR, UH, APPLICATION OR OUR, OUR CASE. UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, AGAIN, UM, I'D LIKE TO STATE THAT I, UH, ADAMANTLY, UH, ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, MR. UH, HEC BONDO, UH, DISAGREE WITH, UH, THE RECOMMENDATION AND THE FINDINGS OF, UH, OF STAFF, UH, AND ALSO WITH THE COMMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE, UM, WITH THE COMMISSIONERS. UH, HOWEVER, I DO WANT TO THANK, UH, THE COMMISSIONERS WHO TOOK TIME TO COME OUT AND, UH, AND DO A SITE VISIT. UH, AND I THINK WE, WE ARRIVED AT A, AT A DIFFERENT CONCLUSION, UH, DEPENDING ON, UH, WHAT PERSPECTIVE WE TAKE. UH, I THOUGHT WE WERE GONNA HAVE AN OBJECTIVE, FAIR, AND IMPARTIAL REVIEW, UH, OF THIS PARTICULAR, UH, CASE. HOWEVER, UH, I MUST SAY THAT, UH, I'M WALKING AWAY, UH, NOT FEELING THAT, UH, WE HAD AN OBJECTIVE IMPARTIAL REVIEW, UH, IN CONSIDERATION, UH, AS YOU NOTED, UH, IN YOUR COMMENTS. UH, AND AS WAS STATED FOR THE RECORD, UH, THE PREVIOUS TIME, I BELIEVE I SHOWED, UH, 20 PHOTOGRAPHS, AND IN FACT, THE, THE PURPOSE OF THE SECOND SITE VISIT WAS BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONSIDERABLE, UH, I, I THINK, UH, DIFFERENT, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS THAT HAD BEEN REPRESENTED. I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, UH, SOMEONE FROM STAFF OR COMMISSIONER PROVIDED THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS. WELL COME TO FIND OUT THAT THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE IN FACT, UH, DOWNLOADED, UH, FROM THE INTERNET, DIDN'T REPRESENT THE CONDITION OF THE HOUSE WHEN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN. I, I, WE DON'T KNOW, UH, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE COMMISSIONERS THAT DID, UH, DO THE SITE VISIT DISCOVERED THE PROPERTY IN ITS PRESENT CONDITION. UH, I THINK THE CHAIRMAN INDICATED THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME ADDITIONS TO THE PROPERTY, UH, CERTAINLY WAS, OR ADDITIONS NOT ONLY TO THE REAR OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT ALSO TO BOTH SIDES OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THAT WAS NOT INDICATED IN YOUR COMMENT, SIR. UM, NOW AS FAR AS, UH, THE THREE ELEMENTS THAT, UH, YOU'RE CONSIDERING AND YOU APPARENTLY HAVE ALREADY AGREED ON, UH, I TAKE ISSUE WITH ONE OF THEM, AND THAT IS, UH, THE HISTORY OF OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY. UH, BASED ON MY, UH, RESEARCH, UH, BASED ON THE DEED OF RECORDS, UH, WITH THE, UH, COUNTY, UH, MR. ETT WAS NOT IN FACT, UH, THE DEVELOPER AND THE BUILDER OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. UH, OUR RECORDS INDICATE THAT THERE WAS TWO, POSSIBLY THREE OTHER OWNERS PRIOR TO MR. ETT. SO, UH, AGAIN, I I BRING THAT TO, UH, TO YOUR ATTENTION. I WOULD ASK YOU FOR CONSIDERATION OF THAT. UH, I THINK THE INTEGRITY OF THIS PROPERTY HAS CERTAINLY BEEN, UH, COMPROMISED AND IT'S NO LONGER THE HISTORICAL, UH, PROPERTY THAT PERHAPS IT ONCE WAS. UH, WE DISCOVERED THAT THE FOUNDATION IN THE ROOF, IN SPITE OF, UH, SOME COMMENTS EARLIER, UH, DID NOT, UH, GET TO THE CONDITION THAT IT EXISTS NOW BECAUSE OF, UH, TREES COMING DOWN. THAT IS SIMPLY THE CONDITION BECAUSE OF POOR WORKMANSHIP THAT WAS PERFORMED IN THOSE ADDITIONS AND ALSO THE REROOF OF THAT STRUCTURE PRIOR TO, UH, THE CURRENT CONDITION. UM, I DON'T WANT TO BE LATER THE CASE. UM, I CERTAINLY WANT TO AGAIN, ASK YOU FOR A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL AND OBJECTIVE, UH, CONSIDERATION OF, UH, THE STRONG OBJECTION, UH, OF THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THAT PROPERTY. I WOULD HATE TO SEE, UH, THIS PROPERTY BE, UH, LIKE SO MANY IN THE AREAS THAT ARE BOARDED UP AND, UH, AND DETERIORATED ON ITS OWN AND EVENTUALLY WILL BE PROBABLY, UH, FALL DOWN. UH, NOW IF THE LA VACA ASSOCIATION IS INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THE PROPERTY AND PURSUING WHATEVER CONSERVATION EFFORTS THEY'D LIKE TO, UH, ENGAGE IN, UH, I THINK THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD CERTAINLY, UH, BE OPEN TO ANY, UH, OFFERS THAT THEY MAY HAVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, UH, YOUR CONSIDERATION. I HAVE A, A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. UH, I ARRIVED PRETTY LATE TO THE D R C MEETING, IN WHICH CASE I MISSED SOME. SO I, I'D LIKE TO OFFER SOME [00:50:01] OF MY OBSERVATIONS OF THAT VISIT. UH, FOR THE RECORD, SINCE THEY WERE NOT ENUMERATED IN THE D R C, UM, I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WALK, WALK THROUGH THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE. UM, PART OF THE REASON WHY I HAD TO REQUESTED AN ADDITIONAL SITE VISIT WAS TO, TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY WAS, TO WHAT EXTENT THAT EXISTED WITH THE ADDITIONS. SO I THINK, UM, THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE PER THE PRINCIPAL HISTORIC STRUCTURE OF THE ADDITIONS WAS PRETTY CLEAR ON THE INTERIOR, MOST CLEAR TO THE EAST, WHERE THE ORIGINAL EXTERIOR CLADDING, UH, AND A DOORWAY OR WINDOW COULD BE SEEN TO THE REAR, UH, THE NUMBER OF REAR ADDITIONS THAT WAS MORE AMBIGUOUS. UM, I AGREE THAT THE ADDITIONS TO THE EAST AND THE REAR DO NOT LIKELY HAVE ANY HISTORIC INTEGRITY IN ANY, ANY, UM, CONSIDERATION HERE, I THINK SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE. I ALSO OBSERVED TO THE EAST A FEW MODIFICATIONS, TWO WINDOWS FENESTRATION. I LOOKED LIKE MAYBE ONE OR TWO WINDOWS WERE MOVED AT SOME POINT WHERE YOU COULD SEE THE OUTLINE OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOW, AND THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF, UH, DAMAGE ON THE EVEN SOFFIT, UH, ON THAT CORNER. I ALSO HAD A CHANCE TO AT LEAST STICK MY HEAD UP INTO THE ATTIC. AND FOR THE MOST PART, I DID NOT OBSERVE ANY ROT OR DECAY, AND THE WOOD WAS IN RELATIVELY GOOD CONDITION. AND YOU DID ALLOW, ALLOW ME TO KIND OF STICK MY HEAD UNDER THE HOUSE, UH, AND LOOK THROUGH A FEW HOLES IN THERE AS BEST I COULD. I'LL NOTE THAT THE FOUNDATION HAS HAD, UH, FULL REPLACEMENT AND CONCRETE PIERCE. UH, THERE WERE SOME LEVELING ISSUES EVIDENT AS WE'RE WALKING THROUGH THE HOUSE, BUT IT'S NO LONGER SITTING ON CEDAR POST. UM, THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WERE KIND OF INTERESTING. THERE WAS ONE SEGMENT OF 12 FOOT WALL THAT KIND OF HAD INTEGRITY AND ALL THE CLADDING AROUND THE REST OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE HAD BEEN MISSING AND REPLACED WITH DIFFERENT MATERIALS, C M U METAL AND A TREE HAD FALLEN OVER PART OF, OF THIS. SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY INTEGRITY IN THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO STAFF FINDINGS. UM, NUMBER FIVE, EMBODIMENT OF DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLE. IT'S BECAUSE IT'S AN EXAMPLE OF QUEEN ANNE. UM, NUMBER EIGHT, IT'S HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL CULTURAL INTEGRITY OF LOCATION, DESIGN, MATERIAL, AND WORKMANSHIP. UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT THAT IS APPROPRIATE TO APPLY HERE, GIVEN THAT IT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST, UH, STRUCTURES ON LOTUS STREET, UH, FROM 1909 AND UH, 13, THAT IT BEARS AN IMPORTANT AND SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DISTINCTIVE STRUCTURES. AND, UH, I DO THINK THAT ONE ALSO APPLIES. AND I TAKE, UH, MR. GALLO'S CONCERN, UH, OF THE CONNECTIONS TO THE NETTE FAMILY. AND I'D NOTE THAT THAT IS NOT A PRINCIPLE DETERMINATION OF ANY OF THE THREE CRITERIA THAT STAFF HAS PUT FORWARD. UM, SO THE THREE THAT STAFF HAS PUT FORWARD I DO CONCUR WITH. HOWEVER, I DO THINK IT'S LIMITED TO THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC FOOTPRINT. AND IF WE GO TO SLIDE 14, MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC. I DON'T RECALL, UH, THE YEAR ON THIS MAP, BUT THAT, THAT FOOTPRINT, UH, APPEARS TO SHOW THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE PRIOR TO ANY ADDITIONS TO THE EAST AND TO THE REAR. AND I WOULD LIKE TO GET ANY OTHER THOUGHTS FROM THE COMMISSION HERE. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ON YOUR RECOMMENDATION. YOU ARE ACTUALLY RECOMMENDING THAT THE, IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE SLIDE WHERE THE RECOMMENDATION WORDING IS. DOES THIS, YOU'RE ACTUALLY RECOMMENDING THAT THE ADDITIONS COULD BE, UH, DEMOLISHED EVEN THEY DON'T NEED PERMISSION FROM US, OR THIS WOULD BE INCLUDED IN OUR RECOMMENDATION OR APPROVAL? YES. IF, IF THE HOUSE WERE DESIGNATED AND THEY CAME BACK AND WANTED TO DEMO THE REAR ACCESSORY AND THOSE NON-CONTRIBUTING ADDITIONS, STAFF WOULD BE ABLE TO APPROVE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVELY. AGAIN, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO STATE THAT, UM, I WAS LOOKING AT THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE ELEMENTS THAT STILL REMAINED. AND I DO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, UM, WORK IS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO, UM, STORE THEM, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT, UH, THEY ARE RESTORABLE. [00:55:04] I'D LIKE TO, TO THINK THAT APPLICANT'S, UH, REPRESENTATIVE FOR SPENDING TIME WITH US OUT ON THE SITE AND GETTING A CLOSER LOOK. IT, IT, IT HELPED ME TO UNDERSTAND, UH, THE CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE AND TO PUT, UH, THE EVIDENCE THAT HAD BEEN SUBMITTED IN, IN CONTEXT. UH, AT THIS TIME, I WOULD MOVE FOR APPROVAL. SECOND, A MOTION IS SECOND FOR APPROVAL. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU, SIR. AGENDA ITEM [B-9 19-6601 Address/Description: 415 N MESQUITE ST/105, 107, 109, 111 and 113 BROWN STREET HDRC Case No.: 2019-480 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: MICHAEL PEREZ/MP2 URBAN DEVELOPMENT LLC Request: Construction of a multi-structure, multi-family residential development City Council Dist.: 2] B NINE H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 19 4 81 0 5 THROUGH ONE 13 BROWN AND FOUR 15 NORTH MESQUITE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT FIVE MULTI-STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE VACANT LOTS AT 1 0 5 THROUGH ONE 13 BROWN AND FOUR 15 NORTH MESQUITE LOCATED WITHIN THE DIGNA WITTY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT STAFF IS NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH W. UM, FOR CONSIDERATION OF TIME, I WON'T READ ALL OF THE STIPULATE OR THE COMMENTS OF STAFF'S FINDINGS, UH, BUT THEY ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE RECOMMENDATION. UM, WE DO HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD, BUT WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME FOR A BRIEF PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON, MICHAEL PEREZ, THREE 30 MISSION STREET, KING WILLIAM. JUST REAL QUICKLY, JUST TO KIND OF WRAP UP, UM, THIS PRESENTATION, WE TOOK IT FROM THE, UH, PRESENTATION WE GAVE ON APRIL 17TH FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. AND WE JUST KINDA KIND OF RECAP, AND I KNOW IT'S BEEN IN SINCE APRIL, BUT KIND OF RECAPPED TO WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, BROWN STREET, UM, IT'S ON CHERRY HOUSTON, UM, PRETTY BIG CORRIDOR. THERE'S COMMERCIAL, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, EVEN SOME INDUSTRIAL, THERE'S A BIG, UH, MERCHANT SIZE HOUSE, ADAPTIVE REUSE COMING IN AND OF COURSE RESIDENTIAL. SO THIS IS A REALLY NEAT TRANSITIONAL AREA THAT I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT. UM, AND HERE AGAIN, THE SITE PLAN, UH, JUST THE SITE PLAN FROM THE LAST TIME ON APRIL 17TH, WE ADDED A CARPORT, UH, ON THE VACANT LOT, UM, RIGHT THERE ON, ON ANOTHER ALLEY LOT, UH, TO HELP ALLEVIATE, UH, PARKING FOR THE, UH, MESQUITE HOUSE RIGHT THERE AND, UH, FOR THE HOUSE RIGHT THERE ON THE COURTHOUSE. UM, SO, UM, WE, WE ADDRESSED THAT PARKING SITUATION THERE. UH, THE ONLY CHANGE. AND THEN OF COURSE WE ADDED, UM, UH, SOME LANDSCAPE CONTEXT, UH, KIND OF PERSPECTIVES VIEW OF, UM, OF THE SITE PLAN AND SOME THINGS TO POINT OUT. UM, KIND OF LOOKING THAT FIRST STAR RIGHT HERE, THAT PERSPECTIVE, I THINK IT'S THIS LONG. IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT HOUSTON STREET TOWARDS BROWN, YOU KIND OF SEE HOW THE ELEVATION, UM, UM, WITH THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSES AND THEN WITH THE INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL KIND OF HOW, WHERE IT SITS ACROSS THE STREET. TWO STORY, UM, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT JUST RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE IT RIGHT THERE, BUT IT'S, IT'S LITERALLY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE MESQUITE HOUSE. AND THERE SHOULD BE ONE MORE STAR ON THERE THAT KIND OF WANNA BRING TO ATTENTION. WELL, I ALREADY DID LINE PERSPECTIVE ALL AROUND IT. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE TOWARDS THE BOTTOM RIGHT MERCHANTS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GOING UP THE FIREHOUSE. UH, I THINK IT'S FIRE STATION NUMBER ONE ON NOLAN AND, UH, CHERRY, PRETTY, PRETTY, UH, PRETTY LARGE STRUCTURE THERE. UM, AND AGAIN, JUST SOME OTHER STRUCTURES ALONG THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS OF CHERRY AND OF HOUSTON STREET. AND YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE BUS STATIONS, I THINK THERE'S KERRVILLE BUS COMPANY AND WHATNOT. BUT ANYWAY, WE CAN GO INTO THE NEXT. SO, UM, THESE ARE OUR MOST UPDATED ONES SINCE WE, UH, OUR LAST D R C WAS ON AUGUST 27TH. THAT WAS LAST TUESDAY, SO ABOUT EIGHT DAYS AGO. AND, UH, WE'VE MADE SOME ADJUSTMENTS SINCE THAT LAST D R C. WE'VE ALSO HAD A PREVIOUS ONE ON JUNE 11TH. AND THIS IS THE CULMINATION OF CHANGES, UH, THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING SINCE OUR APRIL 17TH CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT JUST KIND OF CAREFULLY WORKING ON, UH, FOLLOWING, UH, SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS GOING BACK AND [01:00:01] FORTH, UH, JUST TO KIND OF TIGHTEN EVERYTHING UP. UM, OH, AND, AND HERE'S THE VIEW FROM, UH, THE BROWN ALLEY FROM CHERRY LOOKING DOWN. UM, AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE GOING OVER JUST KIND OF RE GOING OVER, WE'RE TRANSITIONING FROM THAT INDUSTRIAL, THAT MIXED USE THAT, THAT COMMERCIAL, UH, TOWARDS, TOWARDS, UH, TOWARDS MESQUITE STREET TO WHERE IT GETS, YOU KNOW, MORE RESIDENTIAL. UH, BUT ALL, ALL KIND OF IN ONE PROJECT HERE. HERE'S THE VIEW FROM MESQUITE STREET LOOKING DOWN. SO RESIDENTIAL, LOOKING DOWN, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE A LITTLE GHOST IMAGE TO THE LEFT OF THE EXISTING LITTLE STRUCTURE THERE. AND YOU CAN SEE THE CARPORT THAT WE ADDED. UM, RIGHT, RIGHT THERE FOR NOLA AND FOR THE, FOR THE NEXT HOUSE. JUST KEEP THAT IMAGE IN MIND. KEEP THAT NOLA HOUSE IMAGE IN MIND AS I'M GONNA KIND OF TOGGLE WHERE WE CAME FROM, FROM APRIL 17TH THROUGH THE DRCS TO NOW, OH, OH, WELL HERE IT IS, RIGHT HERE. SO AT THE TOP YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED AS OF TODAY, AND THAT'S WHERE WE WERE AT CONCEPTUAL FOUR 17. IT WAS THAT STAIR, STAIR STEP CAMELBACK IDEA THAT WAS SUGGESTED BY EVERYONE. BUT OH, AND, AND, AND JUST KIND OF REALLY POLISHING THAT IDEA TO, I MEAN, THAT THIS IS A BIG IMPROVEMENT. I MEAN, YOU CAN SEE, WE LET, WE CAN, I GUESS WE CAN START FROM WHAT I'M PROPOSING NOW. I GUESS WE CAN START ON THE TOP LEFT, OR, WELL, I'M KIND OF GOING BACK AND FORTH, BUT FROM THE TOP LEFT THAT, UH, THE SOUTH ELEVATION, WE'RE LOSING A GARAGE SPACE, PUTTING IN A CARPORT ON THIS AREA. WE'RE BRINGING DOWN THAT FRONT, UH, UH, ROOF MASSING. I THINK I HAVE IT. I THINK I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE. THANK YOU. RIGHT HERE WHERE IT POINTS IT OUT HERE ARE MY POINTS. MASSING AND ROOF LINE REDUCTION FOR NOLA HOUSE. THE HOUSE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, WE DID OVERALL ROOF LINE, UH, HEIGHT, MASS, UH, MASSING CHANGE. WE REDUCED THE HEIGHT OF THE SMALLER MASSING. THE FRONT ONE, KIND OF THIS FRONT ONE WE'RE DOWN TO 23 FEET, SIX INCHES, UM, COMPARED TO WHEN IT WAS WAY UP HERE. I MEAN, UM, AND THE SECOND ONE, OH, SO IN WHICH IT DOESN'T OVERWHELM THE EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE, IT COMPLIMENTS THE LENGTH OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE FRONT GABLE. WE'LL LOOK AT THAT LAST SENTENCE SO I CAN KIND OF VISUALLY SHOW YOU ON THE BACK HALF OF THE CAMELBACK. UM, SINCE OUR LAST D R C, WE REDUCED IT ANOTHER 16 INCHES FROM 32 4. NOW WE'RE DOWN TO 31 FEET. AND THE SETBACKS ARE MATCHING, OF COURSE, UH, THE, THE ADJACENT, UH, STRUCTURE GOING THE WRONG WAY HERE. OKAY, SO THAT WAS OUR IDEA OF REWORKING NOLA. SO GOING BACK TO THE CUT OUT OF THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, THE LENGTH OF THE EXISTING GABLE, WE BROUGHT, IT'S A ONE STORY HOME NEXT DOOR. AND WE'VE BROUGHT IN ON OUR SIDE. YES. AND, AND, AND OURS, WE'VE BROUGHT IN THAT, THAT FIRST PART OF THAT CAMEL BACK, RIGHT TO WHERE, UH, THAT, THAT FIRST, THAT EXISTING HOME ROOF LINE KIND OF ENDS AND STARTS GOING DOWN. SO THAT'S WHERE I, WE, WE DECIDED, YEAH, WE CAN'T OVERWHELM IT. WE ARE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A ONE STORY, PUT A TWO STORY STRUCTURE RIGHT THERE TO MAKE OR, OR MAKE IT APPEAR THE RIDGE LINE AS A TWO STORY. SO WE CAN STEP IT BACK, WE CAN STEP IT BACK FROM RESIDENTIAL TOWARDS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT COMMERCIAL GOING TOWARDS CHERRY, UH, THAT INDUSTRIAL KIND OF FROM RESIDENTIAL AND JUST KIND OF SWOOPING THAT BACK, UH, WINDOW PROPORTIONS. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS, AND I'M ADDRESSING SOME OF THE, THE COMMENTS THAT Y'ALL HAD. THE WINDOW PROPORTIONS. WE HAD SOME FIXED WINDOWS, SOME NON-TRADITIONAL LOOKING ONES. WE CAN START MAYBE LOOKING AT, OOPS, SO THERE'S THE PREVIOUS, AND YOU SAY YOU LOOK AT WAGON HOUSE, THE ONE ON THE FAR RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT THERE. LOOK AT THE TOP WINDOWS ON THE THIRD FLOOR. SO YOU CAN SEE NOW THERE'RE ONE OVER ONE THAT WAS RECOMMENDED. CASEMENT AWNINGS MORE TRADITIONAL MOVE TO THE MIDDLE ONE, EDWARD, THE TWO HOUSES THERE, NOTE THE TOWERS. THE TWO LITTLE TWO TOWERS RIGHT THERE, THOSE WERE CHANGED IN EFFORT TO GIVE MORE SEPARATION. THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE ON, ON THE COMMENTS THAT WERE ON THERE. AND IF WE MOVE, OOPS, [01:05:01] MORE WINDOWS CHANGING TO THOSE ONE OVER ONE, THOSE TRADITIONAL ONES, THOSE CASEMENTS, THOSE AWNINGS, AND OF COURSE THEY'RE, UM, ALUMINUM BRONZE. AND THEN, UH, WE CAN GO DOWN TO THIS THERE. OLD WINDOWS, NEW WINDOWS, MORE PROPORTIONATE, UM, THAT, THAT, THAT GO. AND AGAIN, YES, WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT CHANGE AGAIN FOR THAT SEPARATION. NO, NO ONE SHARED ROOF LINE, BUT SEPARATE. BUT THESE ARE JUST KIND OF THE BASIC ELEVATIONS. WE'VE KIND OF ALL GONE THROUGH, THROUGH EACH OF THE MAIN, THE, THE HOUSES ALONG BROWN. REALLY. I WANT TO GET TO ENOLA HOUSE. THE, THE, UH, THE HOUSE, UH, THE MESQUITE HOUSE. AND THIS IS KIND OF A LITTLE BIT IN MORE DETAIL, ADDED MORE OF THOSE TRADITIONAL WINDOWS TO THE SOUTH OR THE TRADITIONAL WINDOWS TO THE SOUTH ELEVATION. AGAIN, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE STAIR STEP, THE CAMEL GOING STAIR STEPPING BACK FROM THAT RESIDENTIAL STREET TO GOING, OKAY, YEAH, WE'RE GOING BACK FURTHER INTO, INTO GOING BACK INTO CHERRY, OKAY. AND SOME OTHER, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE, UM, IT GOES BACK TO THE VERY FIRST ONE. IT GOES BACK TO, TO THE APRIL. UH, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE THINGS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ATTACHED GARAGES, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, UM, MIRRORED HOUSES AND, YOU KNOW, NOT TO MAKE 'EM LOOK, YOU KNOW, SO ONE ANOTHER AND, AND THESE ARE SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW. YOU KNOW, THERE'S NEW CONSTRUCTION IN ON LARESA. I THINK IT'S 1226 HERE. YOU CAN SEE THEY, THEY ARE MIRRORED, THEY'RE ALL CONNECTED HOUSES. AND IF YOU NOTICE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, THERE IS A ONE STORY HOME, UM, RIGHT, RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NEXT TO, YOU KNOW, A THREE. I KNOW IT'S NOT A SINGLE FAMILY LIKE WHAT WE'RE DOING, BUT A THREE ATTACHED TOWN HOME. THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT, OF WHAT WE SEE OUT THERE. UM, AND ON THE REAR SIDE OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE ATTACHED PARKING. I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING REALLY BIG THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD TY WHEN WE WENT TO ZONING, IS WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ALL STREET PARKING. GOT IT. COPY THAT. SO HERE'S SOME EXAMPLES OF, YOU KNOW, ATTACHED HOMES LOOK THE SAME. THEY DO HAVE ATTACHED PARKING IN THE REAR, IN THIS CASE, IN THE ALLEY. IT'S HIDDEN IN THE BACK, EXTERNAL, UH, A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO HOME. THIS IS CITY CENTER ON CENTER STREET, UH, TERRAMARK IN DIGO, WITTY, SAME KIND OF THING. YOU SEE 'EM ATTACHED. THEY'RE SIDE BY SIDE. THEY'RE THREE STORIES, JUST LIKE THE LAST ONE. THERE'S A GARAGE IN THE, IN THE REAR. BIG DIFFERENCE IS WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, UH, TOWN HOMES. UH, THESE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN, IN, IN HISTORIC DISTRICT. BUT HERE'S ANOTHER ONE IN KING WILLIAM. THIS IS, UH, CEDAR STREET CONNECTED GARAGES IN THE REAR, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM PHOTO, UH, COLUMN THICKNESS. THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT THAT, ABOUT THE COLUMN THICKNESS HERE. I MEAN, THERE'S SIX BY SIX METAL AND, BUT HERE'S SOME EXISTING EX NEW BUILD EXAMPLES. THREE STORIES OR TWO AND THREE, TWO AND A HALF CONNECTED. WHEREAS, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING SINGLE FAMILY ON THIS UNIQUE, UNIQUE LOT. UM, I THINK THAT'S IT FOR MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. WE HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. WE DO. I'M THE FIRST IS VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN. WHILE THE SOCIETY IS NOT OPPOSED. OH, VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE 91 18 FAIRLAND SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. WHILE THE SOCIETY IS NOT OPPOSED TO APPROPRIATE INFILL INDIGNITY HILL, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. THE SCALE OF THESE UNITS BEING THREE STORIES EACH IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. THIS IS ESPECIALLY EVIDENT AT BROWN AND MESQUITE, WHERE TWO PROPOSED THREE-STORY UNITS SEEM TO SURROUND AND DOMINATE THE EXISTING HISTORIC SINGLE-STORY HOUSE. WE ALSO QUESTION THE USE OF FLAT-FOOTED MODERNISTIC ARCHITECTURE THAT IS ILLUSTRATED IN ONE OF THE UNITS. THIS TYPE OF DESIGN IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL DESIGN VOCABULARY AND IS INCONSISTENT IN DESIGN WITH THE OTHER PROPOSED UNITS PRESENTED IN THIS PROJECT. THERE'S ALSO SOME INCONSISTENCY IN FENESTRATION PROPORTIONS AND PATTERNS ON THE UNITS THAT DO NOT SEEM TO CONFORM TO THE HISTORIC PATTERNS SEEN THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY, PATTY ZZ, PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. MONICA SABINO. [01:10:08] MONICA SABINO, 1120 EAST CROCKETT STREET. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF A HANDFUL OF NEIGHBORS. UM, AND YOU HAVE OUR TEXT IN YOUR, UM, PACKET. AND OF COURSE, WE, UH, SUPPORT O HP'S COMMENTS, UH, THAT INCLUDE EVERYTHING FROM THE SCALE AND MASSING OF THE FARMHOUSE SCALE AND MASSING IN NORTH MESQUITE STRUCTURE. FLAT ROOFS IN RESIDENTIAL AREA LOCK COVERAGE, AGAIN, IS MUCH TOO HIGH FOR THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND AN ATYPICAL LOCK CONFIGURATION SHOULD NOT ALLOW NEW CONSTRUCTION TO VIOLATE THIS GUIDELINE. INSTEAD, FIRST FLOOR FOOTPRINTS SHOULD BE REDUCED OR MAYBE THE NUMBER OF UNITS SHOULD BE REDUCED TO BETTER FIT THE PLAN. UM, UH, A WHILE BACK, UH, THE DWI HILL ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MET WITH THE PRES, HAD A VERY GOOD MEETING IN HELPING THEM GET THEIR ZONING. WE SUPPORTED THEIR ZONING WITH CERTAIN STIPULATIONS. UM, AND, UM, THIS, UM, WE, WE HAVE A LETTER I CAN SHARE WITH YOU GUYS LATER. I ONLY HAVE ONE COPY, BUT, UM, IT WAS COORDINATED BY DISTRICT TWO, COUNCILMAN AND HIS STAFF AT THE TIME. SO THE AGREEMENT WAS BETWEEN OR AMONG, UM, THE D TWO OFFICE, THE PRES, AND THE ARC. UM, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT INCLUDED IN THIS LETTER ARE EACH DWELLING UNIT REQUIRES ADEQUATE SPACE FOR CAR ACCESS AND CAR STORAGE. UM, PER O H P, HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DIGNITY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT, NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER PARKING SHOULD BE BEHIND THE FRONT ELEVATION OF OR BEYOND THE MAIN HOUSE. UM, ANOTHER ITEM THAT WE AGREED UPON WAS THAT LOT DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSE DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS SHOULD BE RESPONSIVE AND CONGRUENT WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND TO THOSE FOUND IN THE PROJECT AREAS. AND ALSO THAT ARC AND THE PEREZ IS CONTINUE AN OPEN DESIGN DIALOGUE FOR THE PURPOSES OF CREATING THE BEST INFILL POSSIBLE. AND VERY HONESTLY, ONCE WE REALIZED WHAT HE WAS DOING AND WANTING TO DEVELOP THESE UNDERSIZED LOTS, WE WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE. HE, HE HAS THE, UM, THE VISION TO GO INTO THESE. THEY ARE ATYPICAL LOTS, UM, BUT SOME INTERESTING THINGS COULD COME ABOUT. BUT ONE THING WE DO BELIEVE IS THAT THE PUBLIC PROCESS WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS TO CONTINUE. THE PEREZ'S AGREED THAT WE INTEND TO ADDRESS THEIR DESIGN PRINCIPLE CONCERNS. WHEN WE'RE READY TO BEGIN THE DESIGN PHASE OF THE PROJECT CONTINUING. ONCE CIVIL IS COMPLETED, WE CAN START ON THE INDIVIDUAL CREATIVE DESIGN FOR EACH RESIDENCE BY USING O H P HISTORIC GUIDE GUIDELINES TO STEER US IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION APPROPRIATE FOR DITY HILL. DURING THIS TIME, WE WILL WORK WITH O H P D H R D R C H D R C FOR INPUT AND DIRECTION TO MAKE SURE EACH HOME DESIGN IS INTERPRETED CORRECTLY AND SUPPORTED. WE'LL ALSO KEEP AN OPEN DIALOGUE WITH THE D H ARC FOR FEEDBACK TO HELP CREATE THE BEST FILL INFILL POSSIBLE. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP A COUPLE OF TIMES, BUT IT'S GREAT THAT THEY WILL COME TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BECAUSE CURRENTLY, AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THE PROJECT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL PRINCIPLES AND THE GUIDELINES DOES NOT RELATE WELL TO THE RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE DISTRICT AND THE DISTRICT'S PREDOMINANT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND WILLIAM CARSON. WILLIAM CARSON, DIGNITY WOODY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. UH, WE, WE DO SUPPORT, UH, O H P RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS PROJECT. UM, WE CANNOT SUPPORT IT AS PRESENTED CURRENTLY BECAUSE, UH, SINCE THERE'S MORE THAN FOUR UNITS, IT DOES REQUIRE, UH, A PRESENTATION TO THE FULL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, AS THE PROJECT CURRENTLY STANDS, WE HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE PROJECT'S HEIGHT AS IT RELATES TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, SPECIFICALLY THE STRUCTURE ON NORTH MESQUITE AND THE MASSING ALONG BROWN STREET. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE. APPLICANT BACK. PLEASE, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU, I I DON'T KNOW IF I DIDN'T, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE YOU DIDN'T REALLY ADDRESS THE STIPULATIONS THAT STAFF HAS IN ORGANIZATION FOR TODAY. DID YOU GO THROUGH THOSE? YES. MY ENTIRE PRESENTATION WAS ABOUT THOSE. OKAY. SO, UM, THEN I MAYBE NOT AGREEING THAT THEY'RE COMPLETELY MET, UM, DID YOU, UM, ADDRESS THE STIPULATION WITH THE THE WINDOWS, THE VINYL WINDOWS? YES. THEY WERE GONNA BE ALL ALUMINUM BRONZE. YOU HAVE NOT SUBMITTED A REVISED, UH, FOR THAT, RIGHT? UH, I JUST TURNED THIS IN RIGHT BEFORE THE MEETING, BUT THESE WERE ALL [01:15:01] ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED ON THE D R C. BUT AS I'M EXPRESSING AND ARTICULATING AND MAKING IT, MY TESTIMONY THAT I'M SAYING I'M GONNA BE PUTTING IN, BUT I CAN PUT IT IN WRITING. YEAH. ALUMINUM, BRONZE ONE AND THE LANDSCAPING. DID YOU ADDRESS THAT? THERE'S A LANDSCAPING PLAN ON THERE. THIS, IN OUR PACKAGE, WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE SCREEN IS A PRESENTATION THAT THE APPLICANT HAS JUST USED TODAY TO ADDRESS STAFF STIPULATIONS. UH, I CAN GO BACK TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED. UH, SO THIS MORE LEFT LESS WAS THE EXTENT OF THE LANDSCAPING INFORMATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED, UH, TO STAFF. UM, I'LL, I'LL BRIEFLY, UH, RUN THROUGH OUR, UH, FINDINGS, UH, OR OUR RECOMMENDATION. UH, SO OBVIOUSLY THE ATTACHED GARAGES IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF ISN'T RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF. UH, STAFF NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT CONTINUED TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE ON NORTH MESQUITE. UM, SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE HISTORIC ADJACENT HISTORIC STRUCTURE. UH, THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT SEPARATE THE MIDDLE STRUCTURE, UH, AS THE APPLICANT NOTED IN THE PREVIOUS, UM, OR IN THE PRESENTATION, UH, THAT WAS A STIPULATION OF CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. UM, STAFF WAS PRIMARILY FOCUSING ON A SEPARATION OF THE STRUCTURES COMPLETELY SO THAT IT DIDN'T READ AS TWO STRUCTURES THAT ARE ATTACHED, BUT RATHER AN INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURE THAT'S SHARED A COMPARABLE WITH, WITH THE OTHER ONES THAT ARE LOCATED OR THAT ARE PROPOSED. UM, FOUR STAFF SPECIFICATIONS. IN REGARDS TO MATERIALS. FIVE STAFF IS SPECIFIC ABOUT EITHER A WOOD WINDOW OR AN ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW, NOT AN ALUMINUM WINDOW. UM, THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT HOW THAT WINDOW WILL BE FRAMED AND IF THAT WINDOW WILL HAVE PROPORTIONS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF SPECIFICATIONS. UH, SEVEN, UM, VARIOUS ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS INCLUDING COLUMN PROPORTIONS. UH, PREVIOUSLY THE APPLICANT HAD NOTED A FOUR BY FOUR COLUMN OR FOUR INCH SQUARE COLUMN. UM, SO THAT'S SPECIFIC. SO THAT'S SPECIFICALLY WHAT STAFF WAS REFERRING TO, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ADDRESSED IN OUR FINDINGS. UM, AND THEN, UH, LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS, UH, SPECIFICALLY, UM, I'LL GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN. THE ADDITIONAL WIDTH OF THE ALLEY TO ADDRESS FIRE CODE STAFF WANTED TO ENSURE, AND THIS IS A STIPULATION THAT STAFF HAS, UM, INCORPORATED IN OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPARABLE OR SIMILAR, UH, CONDITIONS FOR OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVE HAD TO WIDEN DUE TO, TO FIRE ACCESS, UM, TO INCORPORATE A LANDSCAPING ELEMENT THAT, UM, ALLOWS THAT TO FUNCTION AS FIRE ACCESS BUT NOT TO FUNCTION AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PARALLEL PARKING. UM, THAT WOULD BE ATYPICAL FOR THE DISTRICT THING. WE DID TALK ABOUT AT THE LAST D R C MEETING WAS, UH, A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE NOLA HOUSE. YES. AND HOW, UM, THE FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHTS, ESPECIALLY ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND THIRD FLOOR, WERE, UM, COMMENTED WHETHER THOSE COULD BE LOWERED. RIGHT NOW, I THINK THE SECOND FLOOR IS NINE FOOT CEILING HEIGHTS, UH, ON THE INTERIOR, UH, IT'S SAYS, IS THAT THE OLD ONE? YES, WE'RE AT NINE FOOT ON THE FIRST NINE FOOT, UH, ON THE SECOND. AND THEN WE'RE AT, UH, SIX AND A HALF WHERE ON THE THIRD WHERE THAT'S WHERE THE PLATE AND YOU START TO GO, THE CEILING RAFTERS RUN UP. UM, WE'VE REALLY LOOKED AT OPPORTUNITIES TO BRING THIS ENTIRE, UM, HOME, THIS ENTIRE STRUCTURE DOWN. I MEAN, THIS IS THE ONE WE'VE BEEN FOCUSING ON. I KNOW, UM, COMMISSIONER FISH AND CARPENTER, WE, THIS WAS A BIG ONE WE DISCUSSED ON AND WE WORKED ON IT, ESPECIALLY REWORKING, UH, THE LOOK OF IT. UM, AND WANTED TO KEEP WE'RE LOOK ROOF GAVE US, SHOULD WE GO WITH HIP ROOFS? NO, WE NEED TO KEEP GABLES. IT GOES WITH THE OVERALL FLOW AND CONTINUITY OF THE PROJECT, BUT WE DID OUR BEST TO REDUCE AS MUCH AS WE CAN THOSE PITCHES. UM, AND, YOU KNOW, THE WALL, UH, THE, THE CEILING HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, NINE FOOT, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE COMFORTABLE. AND WE WANT THREE BEDROOMS. WE WANT THESE HOMES. WHAT'S THE SQUARE FOOTAGE? THIS ONE ON THIS ONE, IT IS, I BELIEVE IT'S AROUND 1750, ABOUT 18 17 50, 18 50. I CANNOT REMEMBER ON THIS SPECIFIC UNIT, BUT WE WANTED [01:20:01] 'EM TO BE COMFORTABLE HOMES. WE WANT THESE TO BE FAMILY HOMES TOO. YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW A LOT OF YOUNG SINGLES COMING DOWNTOWN, YOU KNOW, LIVING IN MAYBE TOWN HOMES OR WHATEVER. BUT THESE ARE AN OPPORTUNITY TOO, TO WHERE A FAMILY CAN COME IN. SO WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE AND BE MINDFUL THAT WE HAVE AMPLE ROOM IN THE, IN THESE HOMES ON THESE NARROW LOTS. UM, AND SO EXAMPLE ON THIS ONE, UM, JUST YOU'RE WE'RE MENTIONING THIS ONE, WE MENTIONING THE HEIGHTS AND ALL THAT AND ALL THE STIPULATIONS. I GUESS WE CAN TAKE THIS AS AN EXAMPLE BECAUSE, UH, A LOT OF, UH, ALSO THE CITIZENS ARE CONCERNED WITH THIS ONE, RIGHT? UM, THERE AS WELL. YOU HAVE YOU STILL SHOWING WINDOWS THAT ARE NOT IN ACCORDANCE TO THE STIPULATION OF STAFF. OKAY, WE'LL GET THOSE. THE FIXED WINDOWS SINGLE, I'M SURE OUR DESIGNER, UH, THAT WAS AN OVERLOOK OVERSIGHT, BUT WE DO, WE WILL PROVIDE THAT WINDOW DETAIL SHOWING THOSE EXPERIENCE, WANNA MAKE SURE LIKE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. AND THEN YOU DID SAY THAT YOU WENT DOWN FROM 24.6 TO 23. I MEAN, IT'S ONE FOOT OVERALL STILL WAY THAT CAN BE, I MEAN, CUTTING OFF, YOU'RE TALKING, TALKING ABOUT A ONE STORY NEXT TO A TWO STORE IN THE FRONT, BUT THREE IN THE BACK. BASICALLY IT IS A THREE STORY. IS THERE ANY WAY THIS, I MEAN, COULD IT GO DOWN TO TWO STORY BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION? AGAIN, GOING FROM JUNE, UH, D R C TO, TO, TO AUGUST, THIS IS WHERE WE'VE ARRIVED TO MAKE, TO DO OUR BEST ON THE MASSING AND HEIGHT TO ACCOMMODATE, UH, A, A SMALL HALL HOUSE ON A NARROW LOT. I WISH I, SO THIS FIRE LANE DEDICATION, WE HAVE TO DEDICATE SIX FEET IF YOU GO ON OUR SITE PLAN. AND IT REALLY WE'RE DEDICATING SIX FEET OF OUR LOT SPACE. SO WE LOST THAT FOR EMERGENCY AND FOR GOOD REASON. SO WE'RE REALLY WORKING WITH WHAT THE LOT SIZE ALLOWS A COMFORTABLE HOME WHILE FOLLOWING AND RESPECTING AND BEING MINDFUL OF THESE GUIDELINES. AND HOW DOES IT FIT IN WITH THE OVERALL PROJECT? HOW DOES IT FIT IN WITH THE OVERALL PLAN AND FLOW? THESE ARE THE TOOLS AND OR THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH. AND, AND I FEEL, UM, WE HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTING A LOT OF. WE TALKED ABOUT THE LOT COVERAGE PERCENTAGE ON THAT LOT SPECIFICALLY. HAS THAT BEEN POINTED OUT BY STAFF OR NOT? UH, YES. LOT COVERAGE. I THINK WE ABOUT LOT COVERAGE WAY BACK WHEN WE FOUND IT TO BE. OKAY. EDWARD, COULD YOU SHOW, UH, SLIDE 18 AND 42 ITEMS? YOU, YOU, OH, IT LOOKS LIKE WHILE THE PROPOSED FOOTPRINTS ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES, THE ATYPICAL LOT CONFIGURATION OF THE PROPOSED LOTS MAY DEEM TO PROPOSE FOOTPRINTS TO BE APPROPRIATE. THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE, THESE ARE JUST NARROW, I MEAN, SMALL LITTLE LOTS GOING BACK WHO KNOWS HOW LONG, BUT, UM, AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING IN THAT TRANSITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU JUST DON'T SEE ON AN EVERYDAY, UH, STREET THAT YOU WOULD BE ON ANY OTHER STREET. THIS IS JUST A SMALL, ALMOST FORGOTTEN STREET IN DOWNTOWN. I MEAN, IT JUST ISN'T ON, ON YOUR NORMAL STREET ON DAWSON OR ON NOLAN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO THERE, SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. YEAH. SO I'D HELP. WHAT IS THE EFFECTIVE DEPTH OF THE TYPICAL LOT ON THAT STREET, YOUR AREA, UH, ON MOSQUITO BROWN, UH, BETWEEN THE TWO BROWNS, BETWEEN BROWN AND BROWN ALLEY? UM, THE TYPICAL DEPTH. OH, FROM, OH, UH, THEY ARE TYPICALLY, I THINK WE'RE SITTING AT AROUND IF THREE FEET BROWN FROM BROWN STREET TO BROWN ALLEY. SO IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE OVER 50 FEET. AND THE DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT FROM NORTH TO SOUTH YOU'RE SHOWING IS JUST, IT'S BETWEEN IT LOOK, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PROBABLY AVERAGES AROUND 30, IS THAT CORRECT? RIGHT. YEAH. FROM BROWN STREET TO BROWN ALLEY, THAT, THAT'S ABOUT 53. AND FORGIVE ME, I DON'T HAVE MY SURVEY ON, ON, ON HAND, BUT, UM, WELL, I, I, I BRING IT UP TO TALK ABOUT, UM, HOW, UH, AN IRREGULAR LOT WITH THIS DEPTH ORDERED ON TWO SUBSTANDARD STREETS THAT HAVE TO BE ACCOMMODATED IS PARTICULARLY DIFFICULT. AND I'M, AND I'M GONNA BRING THE ATTENTION TO THE GARAGE. OH, OH YES. YEAH. UM, A TYPICAL CONFIGURATION OF A GARAGE WOULD BE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE, A DRIVE NEXT A A DRIVE NEXT [01:25:01] TO THE HOUSE. AND THAT, THAT'S JUST NOT A POSSIBILITY IN, IN A CONFIGURATION WITH A LOT DEPTH THAT BORDERS THAT. SO I DO THINK THAT SOME FLEXIBILITY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, UH, WHEN DEALING WITH THE CAR, GIVEN THE IRREGULARITY OF THIS LOT. UM, I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THE, IT'S THE NOLA STRUCTURE ON THE END. I BELIEVE THERE WAS A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP OF THAT STRUCTURE TO THE ADJACENT ONE. THAT IS PARTICULARLY IT, IT'S IRREGULARLY CITED. YES. UM, IT'S GOT SOME ODD CONDITIONS AND I APPRECIATE YOU MODELING THAT UP. I THINK WE WERE LOOKING AT ELEVATIONS LAST TIME, MAYBE NOT THE, THE THREE D MODEL. UH, I THINK THE, THE BRUNT OF OUR CONVERSATION WAS, UH, TO EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES TO PULL THE MASS DOWN, PARTICULARLY IN THE FRONT. AND I DO THINK THE MASSING IN THE FRONT IS APPROPRIATE. IF WE LOOK ON SLIDE 16 DRAWING NUMBER ONE, THE EYE LEVEL OF YOUR CAMERA IS MUCH HIGHER THAN EYE LEVEL ON THE STREET OR FROM A VEHICLE IN THAT POINT OF VIEW. OH YEAH. BUT THE FRONT PART OF THAT STRUCTURE IS MORE APPROPRIATELY SCALED FROM THE NORTH. LOOKING SOUTH. THERE MIGHT BE SOME OTHER ISSUES WHERE THE THIRD LEVEL PLANE JUMPS BACK. DO WE HAVE A VIEW FROM THE OTHER DIRECTION? I THINK IT WAS KIND OF, IS THAT IT RIGHT BELOW NUMBER TWO? YES. WE'RE LOOKING THAT ONE. YOU'RE LOOKING FROM MESQUITE AND, AND DAWSON, THE TREE IS COVERING IT UP IS ALL I'M TRYING TO ASK. YES. AND JUST FOR REFERENCE, THERE'S THAT VACANT ID DZ LOT THERE. AND I THINK IT'S FOR THREE STRUCTURES. I'M SURE SOMETHING IN, IN THE FUTURE, SOMETHING'S GONNA BE BUILT THERE, BUT, UM, BUT RIGHT. IT'S A VACANT LOT LOOKING, LOOKING DOWN MESQUITE STREET TOWARDS BROWN. TYPICALLY AT THIS VIEW ON, UH, DRAWING 18, UM, WE DISCUSSED IN THE D R C THE POSSIBILITY OF LOWERING THE SECOND FLOOR CEILING HEIGHT, UH, AND POSSIBLY EXPLORING GOING TO HIP ROOFS ON A, THE SEAT TO AGAIN, UH, REDUCE THE SCALE OF THAT NEXT TO THE SMALL HISTORIC STRUCTURE. AND, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN. WE DID, AND WE, WE, AGAIN, KIND OF GOING BACK WITH THE HIP ROOFS, WE LOOKED FOR ALTERNATIVES. JUST TRY ALTERNATIVES TO TRY TO BRING THAT CEILING DOWN JUST FOR THAT SPACE. I MEAN, OUR DOORS ARE, USE EIGHT FOOT DOORS, JUST A NINE FOOT CEILING WILL GIMME THAT EXTRA WIGGLE ROOM. BUT WE LOOKED AT OTHER WAYS TO BRING IT DOWN. AND YES, WE BROUGHT IT DOWN A FOOT IN THE FRONT, 16 INCHES IN THE BACK, JUST LOOKING FOR WAYS WE CAN BRING IT DOWN THAT THE HIP ROOF, IT, IT JUST DEVIATED FROM THE REST OF LOOKING JUST DOWN, JUST KIND OF JUST A FLOW. THE, THE, IT JUST, I JUST COULDN'T, JUST WASN'T THERE FOR, FOR THE OVERALL DESIGN. SO WE JUST TRIED TO FIND OTHER WAYS TO THINK ABOUT REALLY BRINGING DOWN, UH, THE HEIGHT. AND REALLY JUST, I KNOW WE JUST TALKED ABOUT OUR D R C I KNOW WE HAD ANOTHER ONE IN JUNE AND, AND THIS IS JUST THE CULMINATION OF Y'ALL'S FEEDBACK, GOING BACK HOME, THINKING ABOUT IT, LOOKING AT IT, THINKING ABOUT IT MEETING, AND THEN JUST, AND AGAIN, THIS IS SPECIFICALLY THIS FRONT NOLA HOUSE, THE MESQUITE HOUSE. SO I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DRCS. UM, I DON'T THINK I'VE BEEN ON ANY OF, FOR THIS CASE. UM, BUT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH SO MANY STIPULATIONS AND I FEEL LIKE MAYBE THEY WERE ADDRESS SOME OF THEM, BUT MAYBE THEY'RE LOOTING MORE DETAIL. DON'T KNOW. HOW CAN WE COME TO KIND OF A SOLUTION BETWEEN, IS THERE A NEED FOR ANOTHER D R C? DO YOU WANNA COMMENT ON THE FLAT ROOFS THAT A LOT OF THE CITIZENS ALSO COMMENTED ON? YEAH, SURE. UM, THE FLAT ROOFS AND THAT BIG, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT ONE WITH THE JOHANNES CLAY BLOCK, WE'RE KIND OF GOING OFF OF THE INDUSTRIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL. RIGHT. UH, ADJACENT TO THAT, THERE IS MARTIN'S FOODS, I BELIEVE IT'S, IT'S A PREP FOOD, UH, RIGHT, RIGHT NEXT TO IT. UM, COMMERCIAL BUILDING NEXT TO THAT. I THINK THERE'S A GENERAL CONTRACTOR THAT SPECIALIZES IN METALS NEXT TO THAT ON, I'M TALKING ABOUT ON HOUSTON STREET, UH, IS A RESTAURANT ACROSS FROM THIS, UH, THE FLAT ROOFED HOME AGAIN, YOU SEE THE FLAT ROOF, UH, OF, OF MERCHANTS, UH, THAT'S ONE. AND YOU CAN SEE TO THE RIGHT, TO THE SOUTH MARTIN'S FOODS RIGHT THERE, UH, RIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL SPACE [01:30:01] ALONG HOUSTON, A LITTLE NORTH OF, UH, MERCHANTS. YOU HAVE, UH, FIRE STATION AND, AND WHATNOT. AND THAT'S HOW WE SAID, OKAY, WELL LET'S, LET'S SEE OUR SURROUNDINGS WHERE WE CAN START ON THE CHERRY SIDE AND, AND MOVE, UH, MORE OF A, THAT COMMERCIAL THAT THE HARNESS, THAT FLAT ROOF, THAT INDUSTRIAL TO WHERE IT, WE, WE START COMING TO MORE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE NEIGHBORHOOD KIND OF LOOKS. SO IT'S THAT TRANSITION, THAT TRANSITION FROM COM, UH, COMMERCIAL TO, TO RESIDENTIAL. SO LEMME JUMP IN ON THIS JUST A LITTLE BIT. 'CAUSE I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS DEFINITELY A PROOF THAT DESIGN IS AN ITERATIVE PROCESS AND I THINK IT HAS IMPROVED, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THIS, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY HAVE BEEN PAINFUL AND, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY WRECKED YOUR SCHEDULE. BUT THAT'S, THAT'S NOT REALLY OUR CONCERN. BUT I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY BEEN, UM, HEADING IN A BETTER DIRECTION THAN IT WAS. THERE'S A FEW ELEMENTS THAT I THINK YOU'VE REALLY FOCUSED IN ON FROM OUR, OUR COMMENTS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. UH, PARTICULARLY YOU'VE BEEN MASSAGING THE THE NOLA HOUSE. UM, I'M JUST GONNA ASK A VERY OFFHAND QUESTION HERE. WAS THERE EVER AN EXPLORATION OF MAKING THAT SITE, THE COLLECTIVE CARPORT SITE AND DEVELOPING THE OTHER SITE, UH, WITH A STRUCTURE WITH A A RESIDENCE? YOU MEAN JUST FOREGOING THE NOLA HOUSE AND JUST USING THAT AS OFF STREET PARKING THAT WOULD BE COLLECTIVELY USED BY THIS BROWN ALLEY COMMUNITY RIGHT. WITHIN A COMMUNITY. WE'RE GOING FOR NOT HAVING LIKE AN H O A OR, UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CALL IT. LET'S JUST CALL IT AN H O A, SOME KIND OF COVENANT THAT WE, RIGHT. SO THAT WAY, HEY, LOOK, THIS IS MY HOME, THIS IS MY PROPERTY HERE, MY PROPERTY LINES. UM, JUST DON'T WANT TO, AT LEAST FROM MY, MY EXPERIENCE, I JUST DON'T WANT TO BUILD ANYTHING TO WHERE WE'RE GOING. SO THE CARPORT IS EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF THE NOLA HOUSE, RIGHT? RIGHT, RIGHT. AND WE RIGHT FOR THE NOLA. AND WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT JUST SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT LOT GOING BACK TO COVENANTS. AND THAT LOT CANNOT BE BUILT BECAUSE THAT JUST ISN'T AN ALLEY. IT DOESN'T FRONT A STREET. SO ANYWAY, I COULDN'T BUILD ON IT. THE ONLY THING THAT THE D S D WOULD ALLOW ME TO BUILD IS LIKE A CARPORT, NO ELECTRICITY OR NO. UM, WATER CAN BE RUN TO THAT. SO WE'RE HOPING THAT IF THERE IS A WAY TO, AND I KNOW I CAN'T SPLIT THE LOT, BUT SOMEHOW MAKE THAT 'CAUSE I WANT COURTHOUSE AND NOLA HOUSE TO SHARE. IF YOU CAN TAKE THAT AND SPLIT IT RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE, THAT'S WHERE THEY SHARE THEIR PARKING. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY, WAY. AND I STILL HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT. SO THE LOT WHERE THE CARPORT IS, YOU WOULD NEVER HAVE ELECTRICITY THERE OR WATER. I CAN'T, YEAH. I CAN'T BUILD ON IT. AT LEAST THIS IS WHAT MY, MY FEEDBACK. ARE YOU RELYING UPON THAT LOT TO ACHIEVE YOUR IMPERVIOUS PERVIOUS COVERAGE RATIO FOR THE NOLA HOUSE? NO, NO. IT WAS SPECIFICALLY INTENDED FOR PARKING. AND I THINK IT'S ON OUR ZONING SITE PLAN AS WELL. THAT LOT WAS SPECIFICALLY SET OUT FOR OFF STREET PARKING. SO WHAT IS THE PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS RATIO FOR THE NOLA HOUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY MUCH TAKEN OVER EVERYTHING, ESPECIALLY ONCE YOU START FACTORING IN YOUR, UH, YOUR RIGHT OF WAY FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES OVERALL. WELL, THE DEDICATION, THAT SIX FOOT DEDICATION, I CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING ON IT ON THE NOLA HOUSE. UNDERSTOOD. I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE RATIOS IF YOU WERE ACHIEVING THEM, OR ARE YOU GONNA HAVE TO GO FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE, FOR THE PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE THAT LONG? NO, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA GO FOR A VARIANCE ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT THOSE RATIOS ARE. I'D SAY THAT THEY'RE RIGHT AT 49 OR 50%. UH, I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE INTENDED, UH, THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT TO BE THE OVERALL BUILDING. AND IT, IT DOES INCLUDE, THOUGH, PART OF THE PROJECT DOES INCLUDE THAT CARPORT. 'CAUSE WE, WE WANT TO PROPOSE TO BUILD A, A CARPORT ON THERE. SURE. SO, YEAH, I DON'T MEAN TO GET INTO TOO MUCH OF THE WEEDS ON THIS, BUT I'M KIND OF LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT STIPULATIONS HERE. ACCORDING TO THE STAFF COMMENTS, THEY DO EXCEED THE 50. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE EXACT NUMBERS. I THINK I WAS ASKING FOR THAT EARLIER. I DON'T, I DO ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS GONNA BE A HARD THING TO MAYBE ACCOMPLISH BECAUSE OF THE LOT SIZES, BUT, UM, I THINK IT'S IN THE, UM, IT'S COM IT'S IN STAFF FINDING O R RIGHT. IT'S, UM, IT'S ACTUALLY ON FINDINGS LOT. UH, NUMBER O OR LETTER O I, UM, SO THE, THE REASON WHY I'M DIVE DIVING INTO THAT IS JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT, UH, STIPULATION I OR ONE I, I THINK I CONCUR WITH, UH, WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH THAT THE GARAGE ISSUES HERE ARE KIND [01:35:01] OF, UM, THEY'RE TRICKY AND IT'S SMALL. THEY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE TRICKY, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE, UH, RENDERED MOOT BY THE, THE PECULIARITIES I THINK OF THE, THESE ATYPICAL LOTS. I I ACTUALLY REALLY APPRECIATE THE, UH, TRANSITION THAT YOU'VE DONE FROM THE COMMERCIAL TO THE RESIDENTIAL. I THINK THAT WE DIDN'T MENTION IT THIS TIME, BUT ACROSS MESQUITE, THERE'S A TWO STORY HOUSE THAT YOU'RE FACING ON YES. THAT HAS A GABLE FRONTED, UH, FACE. UM, I THINK IT'S A GOOD OBSERVATION THAT COMING FROM THE NORTH, IT'S A LITTLE LESS, UH, FRIENDLY. BUT COMING FROM THE SOUTH, IT CERTAINLY, UH, IS, IS, UH, BEING KIND OF MASKED BY THE HISTORIC HOUSE. UH, ITEM TWO, THE APPLICANT CONTINUES TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT. I THINK YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THAT. UM, I THINK YOU'VE BEEN HAMMERING ON IT THOUGH. UM, I THINK IT, THERE ARE AREAS WHERE IT COULD CONTINUE TO BE CINCHED UP AND, AND REDUCED FURTHER, UH, ITEM THREE THAT THE APPLICANT EITHER SEPARATE THE MIDDLE STRUCTURE. YOU KNOW, I, I I THINK YOU HAVE DONE A, AN, UM, AN ADEQUATE JOB OF BREAKING DOWN AND ARTICULATING THAT MASS. AND IT'S, SINCE IT'S SORT OF THE MID-BLOCK, I BEGIN TO KIND OF GIVE IT A LOT MORE, UH, LATITUDE FROM, UH, THE GUIDELINES AND THOSE THAT ARE PRESENTING THEMSELVES TO THE EDGES OF YOUR, OF YOUR, UH, PROPERTY. UH, ITEM FOUR WHERE A, THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED ADDITIONAL WINDOW SIZES. I THINK YOU WENT THROUGH THAT THROUGH YOUR PRESENTATION. YOU, YOU STILL HAVE SOME, UH, SORT OF ANOMALIES THERE, SOME HORIZONTAL WINDOWS, AND THOSE ARE UNDOUBTEDLY IN, IN BATHROOMS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. UH, ITEM FIVE, ARE YOU ABLE TO ACCOM ACCOMPLISH THAT STIPULATION GIVEN YOUR MATERIAL PALLET WHEREVER YOU USE CEMENT SIDING? YES. OKAY. WE'LL DO, UH, THE BOARD AND BATTEN ON, UH, THE BATONS THAT ARE ONE INCH, UH, HALF INCH? YES. WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING A PROJECT RIGHT NOW IN THAT'S HISTORIC THAT FOLLOWS THE BOARD AND BATTEN. AND OF COURSE THE STANDING, UH, SEAM WE'LL USE 18 WIDE. THE CRAMPS, WE'RE NOT GONNA USE A RIDGE CAP. WE'LL JUST CRAMP THE TOP. OKAY. SO, UM, ITEM SIX. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE STILL WANTING TO HAVE ALUMINUM WINDOWS, BUT STAFF IS, IS HOLDING TO, UH, WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS. AND I THINK THAT IS PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THIS COMMISSION HAS ADVOCATED FOR AS WELL, IN KEEPING WITH THE GUIDELINES. UH, ITEM SEVEN, THE APPLICANT MODIFY VARIOUS ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. THAT'S ALMOST SOMETHING THAT I WOULD, UH, SAY IS PART OF THAT ITERATIVE PROCESS OF DESIGN THAT I'D WANT YOU TO COME BACK WITH STAFF, EVEN IF YOU GET AN APPROVAL HERE TODAY, AND JUST SORT OF GIVE THEM UPDATES IF IT WAS GOING FROM A FOUR BY FOUR POST TO SIX BY SIX OR WHATEVER TO CONFIRM THOSE ITEMS. UM, ITEM SEVEN, IS THAT WHERE I'M AT NOW? THE APPLICANT? UH, NO, NO. ITEM EIGHT, THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS INTO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. YOU DO HAVE A MORE DEVELOPED SITE PLAN THIS TIME, BUT I THINK THERE ARE THINGS THAT I HAVE CONCERN ABOUT, LIKE THAT FIRE LANE THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE BOTH, UH, MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF, UH, OF EMERGENCY VEHICLES. AND YOU'RE PROBABLY ALSO GONNA HAVE TO BE GETTING SOME OF YOUR IMPERVIOUS, YOU KNOW, COVERAGE OUT OF THAT AS WELL. SO THAT NEEDS A LOT OF CAREFUL, UH, CONSIDERATION AND MAYBE THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ON OUR, OUR, OUR BOARD CAN MAKE COMMENT ON THAT. UH, BUT I, I'M GETTING CLOSE TO WHERE I'M SEEING AT LEAST FOUR OUT OF THE EIGHT ITEMS. HERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE REALLY HAMMERED ON VERY, UH, CLOSELY AND THAT MANY OF THE OTHER ONES I THINK YOU CAN CONTINUE TO, TO, UH, REFINE AND WITH SOME FOLLOW-UP DIALOGUE AND CONFIRMATION WITH STAFF. I'D BE COMFORTABLE GIVING YOU APPROVAL. I'D BE CURIOUS TO SEE IF I COULD, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ARE READY TO GO FOR THAT. UH, I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, WHICH APPARENTLY ARE CALLING THE SITE PLAN. UH, ALL I SEE ON THIS PLAN IS TURF AND TREES. ARE YOU NOT PROPOSING ANY KIND OF PLANT BEDS WITH SHRUBS GROUND COVER THIS TIME? I WAS REALLY FOCUSING, I GUESS, ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, UM, JUST HOW IT WOULD LOOK WHERE WE WOULD PLACE SOME MONTEREY OAKS. UM, WE DID PUT SOME WALKWAY PATHS THAT THE STAFF DID, UH, FIND APPROPRIATE. BUT YES SIR, I CAN WORK MORE ON ADDING SOME PLANT BEDS AND SHRUBBERY TO THE, UH, UH, TO THE LANDSCAPE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT. UM, YOU LOOK AT ALMOST ANY HOME AND ANYWHERE AND YOU DON'T SEE JUST TURF RUNNING UP TO THE FOUNDATION OF THE BUILDING, CORRECT? YES. IT'S, WE'LL DEFINITELY ADD SOME MORE, WE'LL WORK ON THAT. AND I THINK STAFF HAD ALSO COMMENTED THAT THEY WANTED, UM, THE SIDEWALK TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THE, SORRY, THE PAVERS ON THE NORTH MESQUITE HOUSE TO GO ALL THE WAY TO THE SIDEWALK. THERE'S NO SIDEWALK ON, UM, MESQUITE STREET. I THINK THERE IS, BUT IF THERE IS, I, I CAN'T RECALL [01:40:01] IF THERE IS, WE'LL DEFINITELY DO THAT. BRING IT ON. I, UM, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING, UH, AN APPROVAL YET. I DO FEEL LIKE, UM, I DO AGREE THAT SOME OF THE STIPULATIONS HAVE BEEN, OR BEING WORKED ON. UM, I'M JUST A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ALSO WITH THE PRESENCE OF OUR CITIZENS HERE AND THEIR CONCERNS THAT MAY BE, UM, MAYBE NOT A D R C, BUT GIVE THE APPLICANT THE TIME TO REVISE A LITTLE WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL, SOME OF THOSE STIPULATIONS THAT ARE STILL NOT ADDRESSED A HUNDRED PERCENT MAYBE WORK WITH STAFF FOR THAT FOR THE NEXT MEETING. I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GRUE. I THINK THAT, UM, I WANNA THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORT AND YOU KNOW, , THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE. YEAH. BUT IS THIS SOMETHING, ED, IS THIS EDWARD, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT HE CAN WORK WITH YOU AS HE GETS CLOSER TO MEETING THOSE STIPULATIONS, UH, ON SOME OF THEM, BUT I THINK STAFF HAS BEEN PRETTY CLEAR ON WHAT WE FIND TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE DISTRICT AND WHAT WE FIND, AND I BE, SO, UM, SOME OF THESE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE JUST GONNA TAKE COMMISSION ACTION. UM, WHEREAS SOME OF THEM MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS, UM, THINGS LIKE THAT MAY BE ABLE, AND ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS MAY BE ABLE TO BE WORKED OUT WITH STAFF. AND I GUESS WE DID MENTION THAT ON, ON, ON ITEM, UM, STIPULATION NUMBER ONE. I FEEL LIKE THE STIPULATION NUMBER TWO IS QUITE IMPORTANT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I ALSO FEEL LIKE MAYBE TO NOT PUT THAT ON STAFF, UM, AS TO A FINAL APPROVAL FOR THEIR SITE TO ACTUALLY COME FROM US, WHICH IS THE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST PROMINENT FOR A PROJECT, THE MOST IMPORTANT PROJECT STIPULATION NUMBER TWO I FEEL IS IMPORTANT. WELL, I, SO THERE'S A PIECE OF DATA HERE THAT I DO THINK IS IMPORTANT AND THAT'S THE, UH, A CLEAR ANSWER ON THE PERVIOUS COVER. OH, OKAY. PERVIOUS COVER. I'M, I'M SORRY, WHAT DID, WHAT DID, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE SIX FOOT RIGHT OF WAY? NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT OVERALL LOCK COVERAGE AND, AND ATTAINING TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PERVIOUS VERSUS IMPERVIOUS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU ALL WERE DESIGNING UP AGAINST THOSE AND THAT IT, IT WAS CONSIDERED EARLY ON AND I DON'T THINK IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THIS COMMISSION TOSSED OUT. SO IT AS A, AS A CONSIDERATION, UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE, UH, STRIP OF LAND ON THE NORTH, UH, THAT IS ACCOMMODATING ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES WAS INTENDED TO BE PERVIOUS. BUT I THINK THOSE DETAILS ARE IMPORTANT. RIGHT. UM, I BELIEVE I NEED TO CHECK WITH TRAFFIC. I KNOW I HAVE TO DEDICATE THAT OVER. AND AGAIN, I'M GONNA, I HAVE TO DEDICATE SO THAT WAY VEHICLES CAN GO, COME AND GO. I DON'T, I CAN'T BUILD ON IT. SO I GUESS I HAVE TO GET WITH TRAFFIC TO SEE WHAT TYPE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, UH, QUALIFIES OR CORRECT. OKAY. , I MEAN, YEAH, IT'S, IT'S MORE LIKE, UH, YOU PROBABLY NEED TO GET WITH A FIRE MARSHAL TO SEE WHAT KIND OF PERVIOUS COVERAGE WILL BE ACCEPTABLE RIGHT. FOR THEIR FIRE TRUCKS TO GO ACROSS. AND THAT GETS PRETTY TRICKY. YEAH. IT'S SOMETHING THAT, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT BEFORE. OKAY. UH, WHERE AN ALLEY IS BEING USED FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS IN THIS, IN THIS CASE. AND, UM, I, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY THAT IS, IS A CONTI CONTINUOUS STRIP. I KNOW THAT IT HAS TO BE MAINTAINED OPEN. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S TURNED OVER. RIGHT. UM, SO I'D LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE, IMPERVIOUS COVER AND, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER. I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE NOLA ELEVATION, PARTICULARLY FROM THE NORTH. I'D NOTE THAT THE, THE REDUCTION IN HEIGHT FROM, UH, ON THE STREET END AND THE WAY YOU'VE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THAT BREAK, UH, TO REDUCE THE SCALE AND THE PRESENCE OF THE SCALE ON THE STREET, UH, IS MORE SUCCESSFUL WHEN YOU'RE MOVING TO THE NORTH FROM THE SOUTH. AND THAT THERE IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE, I BELIEVE, ACROSS THE STREET AND MAYBE A LOT OVER THAT KIND OF SUGGESTS THAT THAT COULD HAVE BEEN, UH, TWO STORY. IT'S THE THREE STORY WALL AND IT'S PREVALENT VIEW FROM THE STREET THAT MAY NEED AN ADDITIONAL, UH, SOME ADDITIONAL ARTICULATION ELEMENTS. UH, AND LET ME JUST SUGGEST WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE. OKAY. SO WHAT YOU'RE DOING NOW TO CHANGE, TO, TO BREAK THAT LONG TALL WALL UP IS YOU'RE CHANGING MATERIAL HALFWAY DOWN THERE. I'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU COULD EXPLORE, UM, ADDITIONAL STRATEGIES TO FURTHER BREAK THAT. THE, THE MATERIAL FROM LAP SIDING TO WHERE, I'M SORRY, BELIEVE YOU'RE CHANGING FROM LAP SIDING TO STUCCO. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING? YES. IS THAT, I'M MAKING SURE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE, WE, SO I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT STRONGER THAN THAT TO HELP BREAK THAT ELEVATION. [01:45:01] I THINK A THREE STORY WALL THAT'S PLAINLY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET IS GONNA BE PROBLEMATIC, RIGHT. THE, UH, MATERIAL, RIGHT. BREAKING THE MATERIAL IS ONE STEP, BUT YOU HAVE AN EAVE, UH, ON THE LOWER SECTION THAT MAY BE ABLE TO BE CARRIED BACK. OKAY. MAYBE THAT UPPER WALL, THE THIRD STORY WALL COULD STEP IN A FOOT TO ALLOW THAT EAVE AND ROOF LINE TO CONTINUE AT THE TWO STORY LEVEL RATHER THAN HAVE A THREE STORY STACKED WALL. SO MY MY POINT IS, I HAVE SOME CONCERN ABOUT THAT THREE STORY ELEVATION BEING PLAINLY VISIBLE FROM MESQUITE. AND I'D BE, I'D, I'D HOPE YOU'D EXPLORE ADDITIONAL OPTIONS TO BREAK THE SCALE DOWN. THOSE, THOSE ARE JUST KIND OF ILLUSTRATIONS OF MY CONCERN, UH, NOT NECESSARILY A SOLUTION. WELL, THIS IS GOOD FEEDBACK. UM, I'M, I'M GRATEFUL FOR THIS. ADDITIONALLY, AS WAS UH, DISCUSSED BY SOME OF THE CONCERNED CITIZENS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HASN'T OFFICIALLY BEEN ABLE TO TAKE A POSITION ON IT BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO TAKE IT TO THE FULL MEETING. OKAY. UH, A POSTPONEMENT, UH, TODAY MAY ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT AND TAKE A POSITION. SO I, I'D APPRECIATE IT IF THAT, UH, OPPORTUNITY COULD BE ACCOMMODATED. NOW, GOING BACK TO JUST, I GUESS FOR CLARIFICATION FROM WHAT WAS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL BACK IN APRIL FROM WHERE WE ARE NOW? I KNOW SOME OF THE CITIZENS SAID, WELL, I, YOU KNOW, ALL THREE STORIES, ALL OF THEM, AND THEY ALMOST SOUND LIKE, AND I HOPE WE'RE NOT STARTING FROM SQUARE ONE, FROM WHAT WE WORK TO OKAY. BECAUSE YEAH, NO, YEAH. CONCEPTUALS USUALLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IS THIS A GENERALLY IN THE RIGHT DIRECTIONS OKAY. SITE AND, UH, YOU KNOW, CONFIGURATION, THAT KIND OF THING. RIGHT. BUT SINCE THEN YOU, YOU, THERE'S STILL A LOT YOU'VE BEEN WORKING YEAH. A LOT OF WORK TO, TO DO. OKAY. AND, UM, AND I, I DO HAVE A CONCERN THAT YOU, THAT YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GIVE THAT PRESENTATION. I DON'T THINK WE'RE UNDER ANY OBLIGATION TO DIRECT YOU TO DO THAT, UM, UH, AS A, AS A CITY ENTITY. SO, UM, BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A, A GOOD THING TO DO THAT. THANK YOU. JUST A QUICK COMMENT ABOUT YOUR SIX FOOT WIDE ADDITIONAL DRIVABLE AREA. UH, THERE ARE PRODUCTS THAT ARE PERVIOUS THAT WILL ACCOMMODATE FIRE TRUCKS AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES THAT ARE MODULAR UNITS THAT SNAP TOGETHER AND CAN BE FILLED WITH SMALL GRAVEL THAT YOU MIGHT CONSIDER FOR THAT. UH, ONE OF THE SOURCES FOR, FOR THOSE PRODUCTS IS CALLED INVISIBLE STRUCTURES. THAT WOULD HELP ON YOUR PERVIOUS COVER PERCENTAGE THAT WE STILL NEED. AND IF NOT, THEN I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO 'CAUSE WE NEED, OR I GUESS WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT IMPERVIOUS VERSUS IMPERVIOUS. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS. AND, AND YOU WANT ME TO GET CLARIFICATION FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THAT, WHAT THAT RIGHT OF WAY IS. MR. CHA, I'D LIKE TO COMMEND THE GENTLEMEN HERE FOR THE GOOD WORK. THE, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN LOOKING AT HISTORIC STRUCTURES, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE, UH, SEE THAT THEY DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND NECESSARILY JUST, JUST FROM LOOKING AT A BUILDING IS THAT IT'S WELL DONE. SO PART OF THE CONTEXT OF A NEW BUILDING IN THE CONTEXT OF OLD BUILDINGS IS DOES THE NEW BUILDING STAND UP TO THE QUALITY OF THE OLD BUILDINGS? AND LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN, I CAN SEE YOUR BUILDING IN WHAT'S BEEN THERE FOR A HUNDRED, 150 YEARS. SO, SO YOUR WORK IS VERY GOOD. AND I, I APPRECIATE THE WAY THAT IT TRANSITIONS INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S ALMOST A COMMERCIAL BREAKDOWN THAT GOES INTO A RESIDENTIAL BREAKDOWN. AND THE CONTEXT OF THE FABRIC THAT IT'S AN EAST WEST PROPERTY AS OPPOSED TO A NORTH, SOUTH PROPERTY, I THINK ENABLES THE ARCHITECTURAL DIALOGUE YOU'VE CREATED. SO I, I ENCOURAGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO TO LOOK AT THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE YOUR, YOUR FRINGE, HOW IT TRANSFORMS FROM, FROM THE DOWNTOWN URBAN INTO WHAT IS SOLIDLY RESIDENTIAL, THAT YOU REALLY HAVE ONE OPPORTUNITY AND IT'S TYPICALLY THE FRINGE OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT, REALLY EXCITING TO HAVE THIS TRANSITION. SO IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A PRO OR A CON, IT'S JUST IN, IN, IN, IN THE CONTEXT OF YOUR DESIGN WORK AND HOW IT FITS INTO THIS URBAN FABRIC. UH, IT'S VERY, VERY WELL DONE. SO, [01:50:01] UH, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT, THAT AS YOU GO BACK TO WORK AT THESE DETAILS, ENCOURAGEMENT CAN, CAN GET YOU TO WHERE YOU NEED TO BE AS WELL. SO I ENCOURAGE Y'ALL TO CONTINUE TO DO THE GREAT DESIGN THAT THIS REFLECTS. SO FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, I'M NOT SURE WE CAN GET TO A MOTION ON THIS, UH, PROJECT OR WHETHER, UH, WE ASK THE APPLICANT TO TAKE ALL THE COMMENTS YOU'VE RECEIVED TODAY, UH, GO BACK AND, UM, ADDRESS THEM, STAFF STIPULATIONS, THE COMMENTS YOU'VE HEARD TODAY. UH, ENCOURAGE YOU TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AGAIN AND, UH, POSSIBLY, UH, ASK TO POSTPONE UNTIL NEXT COMMISSION MEETING FOR ACTUAL ACTION. MR. MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A MOTION THAT MINIMIZES WHAT IS REQUIREMENT BASED ON THOSE POINTS THAT, THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SO THAT THEY DON'T GO BACK AND HAVE TO REHASH THINGS THAT EVERYBODY ALREADY AGREES ON? AND, AND WELL, THE PROBLEM IS THAT IF WE RECOMMEND AN APPROVAL WITH STIPULATIONS, THEN IT'S UP TO STAFF TO ACCOMMODATE. NOT NECESSARILY, I MEAN, THE COMMISSION CAN REQUIRE, UM, EVEN WITH A MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL THAT STIPULATIONS BE, UH, APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION. BY THE COMMISSION, YEAH. JUST IN THE SPIRIT OF ENABLING THEM TO FOCUS, BECAUSE IT, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS ON THE TABLE, AND I KNOW THAT IF SOMETIMES IF YOU MOVE ONE DIMENSION, IT AFFECTS 10 OTHERS. SO IF THEY'RE ABLE TO FOCUS ON THOSE THINGS THAT ARE MOST CRITICAL, LIKE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE, ON THE FIRE, UH, REQUIREMENTS, UH, NOT TAKING ACTION ON A, ON A, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S LOOKING FOR IT. DENIAL. I THINK THAT, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT'S SAKE, I THINK HE, WOULD YOU LIKE A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE, MR. PARIS? I'M NOT SURE. OKAY. UM, 'CAUSE EVEN IF WE TAKE ACTION AND APPROVE OF THE STIPULATION, YOU HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION. I MEAN, I THINK YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT WE WILL, WE'RE WORKING THROUGH AN APPROVAL. WE'RE NOT GOING TOWARDS A DENIAL. WELL, I'D HAVE TO COME. BACKMAN WON'T. YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK EITHER WAY, WELL THEN I'D RATHER GET THE APPROVAL AND COME BACK AGAIN. BUT I, I, I AM IN AGREEANCE IF WE CAN JUST DRILL DOWN AND AIM SMALL SO I'M NOT STARTING ALL OVER BACK FROM APRIL AND BRINGING EVERYBODY BACK. IF WE'VE ALREADY DONE THAT IN OUR COMMENTS, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING ACTION WITH THE STIPULATIONS. UM, I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE ASKING THE APPLICANT TO REALLY, I THINK YOUR COMMENTS HAVE BEEN VERY DETAILED, THAT YOU HAVE A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, A LOT TO COME BACK WITH. ONE OF THE THINGS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY STANDS OUT TO ME AS A DATA POINT, THE, THE PREVIOUS COVER ON THE LOT, IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD HAVE HERE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT IS A CONCERN THAT'S BROUGHT UP FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HERE VERSUS REQUIRED. I'D SAY A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY AND EVERYTHING. YOU, YOU, YOU MIGHT BE MEETING THAT COVERAGE, IT'S JUST NOT CLEAR TO US. I'LL GET THAT IDENTIFIED. THAT'S A BIG ONE. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. AND I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT, IF I CAN RECALL, NOT IN THIS PRESENTATION, BUT ANOTHER ONE, A 36 PAGER, WE HAVE THAT IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE PLAN. BUT I'LL GET THAT, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. I WOULD ALSO ENCOURAGE YOU TO GET WITH STAFF AND REVIEW THE MATERIAL THAT'S AVAILABLE ON A, ON A SIMILAR PROJECT AT, UH, THREE 15 NORTH HACKBERRY. IT'S WHERE HACKBERRY AND THEY'RE MAKING USE OF ARMSTRONG. ARMSTRONG PLACE IS VERY MUCH KINDA LIKE BROWN, WHERE IT'S THIS, UH, BOTH BROWN AND BROWN ALLEY, RIGHT? SOMEWHAT, UH, NEGLECTED AND, AND, UH, OVERLOOKED STREET. BUT THEY HAD TO MAKE THAT INTO A FIRE LANE. AND THEY CAME TO US WITH A LOT MORE DEVELOPMENT ON THAT FROM A SITE PLANNING AND FROM A IMPERVIOUS, IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE. AND SO IF YOU LOOK TO THAT AS AN EXAMPLE OF KIND OF HOW YOU NEED TO BORE INTO THAT, THAT MIGHT HELP PREPARE YOU TO GO TO THE FIRE MARSHAL AND OTHERS THAT I THINK HAVE INPUT ON THIS, YOU KNOW, BEYOND WHAT I, WHAT WE CAN SAY ABOUT THE PROJECT. SOUNDS GOOD. YEAH. SO, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR A POSTPONEMENT OF DECISION ON THIS PROJECT, UH, TO PERMIT THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT, UH, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE, UH, RAISED HERE TODAY. SECOND. SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND FOR POSTPONEMENT. ANY DISCUSSION IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU GUYS. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. NEXT TIME. THANK YOU. AGENDA [B-10 19-6621 Address/Description: 931 N OLIVE ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-455 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Hank Parker/PSW Real Estate Request: Construction of a multi-unit, multi-family residential structure City Council Dist.: 2] ITEM B 10, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 19 455 9 31 NORTH OLIVE HAS BEEN POSTPONED BY THE APPLICANT TO THE SEPTEMBER 18TH H D R C HEARING. [B-11 19-6637 Address/Description: 525, 527 E HUISACHE AVE HDRC Case No.: 2019-491 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: David Bogle/SYNCRO Studio Request: Construction of a rear addition, site modifications, window replacment and modifications City Council Dist.: 1] [01:55:02] MOVING TO ITEM B 11 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 9 1. ADDRESS, 5 25 AND 5 27 EAST ATCH STAFF IS GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING SKYLIGHTS, UM, WINDOW REPLACEMENT, AS WELL AS STAFF'S STANDARD WINDOW STIPULATIONS AS THEY APPLY TO THE MID-CENTURY STRUCTURE. WE DO HAVE A CITIZEN SIGNING TO SPEAK, BUT WE WILL CALL THE APPLICANT UP AT THIS TIME TO PRESENT THE PROJECT. I'M DAVID BOGLE, UH, 7 23 WEST FRENCH PLACE. I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR THIS PROJECT. UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AS A NEW PROJECT, THOUGH. SOME OF YOU HAVE SEEN IT BEFORE IN A PREVIOUS ITERATION. UM, SITE IS ON THE EDGE CONDITION OF THE, UM, MONTE VISTA HISTORIC DISTRICT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SITE IS IS OUT OF, OUT OF DISTRICT AND MF 33 ZONING AND COMMERCIAL ZONING ACROSS THE STREET. UM, THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A REAR BUILDING EDITION. MET WITH THE MONTE VISTA HISTORIC ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IN JULY, AND WE RECEIVED GENERALLY FAVORABLE, UM, COMMENTS FROM THEM. UM, WE HAD AN ADDITION PROPOSED OF APPROXIMATELY A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET AT THAT TIME. THEIR ONE CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENT WAS, THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE TOO BIG. UH, RIGHT NOW WE'RE UNDER 900 SQUARE FEET WITH OUR ADDITION AND WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GUIDELINES. WE'VE MET WITH THE D R C AS WELL AND GOT POSITIVE COMMENTS FROM THEM. SO I'D LIKE TO, TO REALLY SKIP STRAIGHT TO THE, UM, STIPULATIONS AND, AND ADDRESS THOSE, THOSE ISSUES. UM, I THINK THE, THE FINDINGS, ITEM D UH, WINDOW REPLACEMENT IS THE FIRST ONE I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT AND GO TO THEM. UM, SO THIS IS THE, THE UPDATED, UM, ELEVATION, ACTUALLY, I'M SORRY, THIS IS THE ALTERNATE. UM, YES. SO THIS IS A, UH, MODIFIED ELEVATIONS DRAWING TO SHOW SOME PROPORTIONS. AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO AREN'T ARCHITECTS, WE, WE LOOK AT THE PROPORTION OF HEIGHT AND WIDTH. UH, AND OFTENTIMES WE JUST DRAW THAT DIAGONAL LINE TO REPRESENT GRAPHICALLY THE RATIO OF HORIZONTALITY OR, OR VERTICALITY. SO THERE'S SOME DIAGONAL LINES ON SOME OF THESE. AND IF WE COULD ZOOM IN TO THE FRONT ELEVATION AT THE BOTTOM. UM, SO THE EXISTING FENESTRATION ARE, ARE, UH, THIS WAS BUILT IN THE FIFTIES, AND THESE ARE STEEL CASEMENT WINDOWS. SO THE EXISTING FENESTRATION INCLUDES BOTH HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL COMPONENTS. THE OPERABLE VERTICAL, UH, CASEMENTS ON THE SIDES, THERE'S A FIXED PANEL IN THE MIDDLE, AND THEN IT'S GOT THE LITTLE HORIZONTAL KIND OF CLEAR STORY ACROSS THE TOP. SO TAKING THAT AND THE GENERAL OVERALL HORIZONTALITY OF THE DESIGN, UM, WE'RE PROPOSING BOTH VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL WINDOWS. AND THE, THE ELEVATION ABOVE IS THE, THE SIDE ELEVATION FACING WEST. SO THE, THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS TO THE RIGHT. AND THE, THE FIRST WINDOW YOU SEE IN THIS MIDDLE ELEVATION IS AN EXISTING WINDOW TO REMAIN. IT'S A STEEL CASEMENT WINDOW. UH, AS YOU MOVE TO THE LEFT, THERE'S A FENCE, A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE BEHIND, WHICH IS A EXISTING DOOR OPENING TO BE, UH, MAINTAINED. AND THEN WE'VE GOT TWO NEW WINDOWS PROPOSED. THE STAFF, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING BOTH NEW WINDOW, THE SMALLER ONE AND THE REPLACEMENT WINDOW. THE LARGER ONE ARE WHAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS AND ASK, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT THAT. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING ARE, ARE, UH, A NEW WINDOW IN THE KITCHEN AREA, THE SMALLER ONE AND THE, THE LARGE ONE IN THE, IN THE BEDROOM SLEEPING ROOM. THESE ARE NEW WINDOWS IN THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, BUT THEY'RE 75 FEET FROM THE FRONT CURB AND THEY'RE BEHIND THE FENCE, VIRTUALLY IMPERCEPTIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC REALM. UM, AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE ADDRESSING VERY SERIOUSLY THE, THE CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS AS WE, UH, SPECIFIED THESE, WHICH [02:00:01] ARE COMPOSITE HORIZONTAL SLIDING WINDOW. AND WE CHOSE THAT BECAUSE OF THE SMALLEST, UM, VERTICAL MULIAN ELEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO GLIDERS THAT EMULATES THE, THE STYLE OF THE EXISTING CASEMENT. SO BOTH OF THOSE HAVE A VERTICALITY. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPORTION OF THE VERTICAL PORTION OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS MOVING TO THE REAR OF THE ADDITION, WHICH IS THE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDED PORTION OF THE BUILDING. UH, WE'RE PROPOSING TWO PRIVACY, UH, SECURITY WINDOWS IN THE BATHROOM AND IN THE REAR SLEEPING ROOM, REAR BEDROOM. AND THOSE PICK UP ON THE HORIZONTALITY OF THE, BOTH THE OVERALL STRUCTURE AND THE PORTIONS OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS. UH, YOU CAN SEE THE DASH LINE REPRESENTING THE HEIGHT OF THE PRIVACY FENCE BEHIND WHICH YOU, WE WOULD KNOW HOW TALL THE WINDOWS ARE OR NOT. UM, AND UH, SO THEY'RE CONSISTENT WITH THE HORIZONTAL PROPORTIONS. THE UPPER ELEVATION ON THE SAME SHEET IS THE EAST SIDE. AND I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT AGAIN, FROM THE LEFT SIDE, THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE, WE'RE KEEPING THE EXISTING STEEL CASEMENT WINDOWS THE EXISTING DOOR, THEN THE NEW WINDOW, AND THEN ANOTHER NEW WINDOW. AND THERE'S A SIX FOOT PRIVACY FENCE EXISTING IN ON THIS SIDE THAT, UH, AS YOU SEE WHERE THE SHADOW IS, WHERE THE HAND IS RIGHT HERE. AND, AND IN MY, MY MODEL I'VE DISCOVERED I'VE BEEN DRAWING AND MODELING THAT FENCE AT THE REAR OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. BUT IN FACT, IT'S UP HERE. SO, SO IT WOULD REMAIN UP HERE. AND THE LARGER BEDROOM WINDOW WOULD BE ALSO BEHIND THE PRIVACY FENCES. UH, WE'VE GOT SOME VISUALIZATION STUDIES FROM THE FRONT AND THE ORIGINAL, UM, OTHER PACKAGE, UH, SUBMISSION AND, AND YOU CAN KIND OF GET A SENSE HOW FAR BACK YEAH, THESE ARE. SO I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THESE, THESE VIEWS AS EXISTING WINDOW AROUND THE CORNER EXISTING DOOR AND THE TWO NEW WINDOWS THAT WE'RE, WE'RE ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF THE, THE PROPOSED WINDOWS. UM, R EIGHT COMPOSITE. SO IT'S LIKE 40% WOOD COMPOSITE, AND IT COMES IN A PRE, UH, PRE-FINISHED COLOR THAT'S, UH, KIND OF A COFFEE COLOR OR KIND OF A CHEROKEE RED, A DARK BROWNISH CHEROKEE RED THAT WE WOULD PICK UP ON AND PAINT THE REST OF THE WINDOWS TO MATCH THE REST OF THE COLOR SCHEME'S. NOT TOTALLY WORKED OUT, BUT THE WINDOWS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT. UM, I APOLOGIZE FOR JUMP JUMPING IN HERE, MR. BOGLE, DO YOU HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE, OF THE TWO EXISTING CASE MOUNT WINDOWS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING TO REPLACE? I'M JUST, YES. STRUGGLING TO FIND. YEAH, WE DO. UH, SORRY, AT THE BEGINNING. SO IF YOU COULD ACTUALLY, YOU, YOU WERE, SO THIS IS THE FRONT, FRONT VIEW KIND OF ZOOMED IN AND, AND THEN WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE. WE'LL LOOK AT THIS SIDE FIRST. SO THIS IS THE EXISTING DOOR AND THIS IS THE FRONT CASEMENT THAT WE'RE GONNA PROPOSE TO KEEP. HERE'S THE EXISTING PRIVACY FENCE, THE DOOR BEHIND IT, THE SMALL WINDOW THAT WE'RE REMOVING AND REPLACING WITH ANOTHER KITCHEN WINDOW. AND THEN BEYOND THAT, SO THE WINDOW THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING RE BE REPLACED IS THE SMALL WINDOW. WELL, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION LANGUAGE USES THE WORD REPLACEMENT FOR NOT THE SMALL ONE, BUT FOR WHAT'S A BEDROOM WINDOW IN THE EXISTING. AND IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE SAME SIZE. THAT'S, UH, I DO HAVE FURTHER BACK. SO, SO IT'S BEHIND THIS FENCE. I AM CONFUSED BECAUSE IN THE APPLICATION IT DOES SAY THAT YOU ARE GONNA REPLACE THE CASEMENT. SO THAT'S NOT THE CASE ANYMORE. LET, LET ME CLARIFY. UM, SO THERE ARE TWO EXISTING CASEMENT WINDOWS ON THE PROPERTY AND YOU CAN KIND OF START TO SEE THEM BACK HERE. SO THERE'S ONE BACK HERE AND THERE'S ONE IN THE SAME LOCATION ON THE OTHER FACADE. UM, HE IS PROPOSING TO REPLACE THOSE. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PICTURES OF WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE RIGHT NOW. GO TO PHOTO 31 AND TO CLARIFY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SO THESE ARE THE SMALLER WINDOWS, WHICH ARE, HE'S ALSO PROPOSING TO REPLACE, WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THESE SMALL ONES. WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THESE BE RETAINED BACK HERE. THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE WINDOW WE DON'T HAVE A PICTURE OF. SO THE, THE WINDOWS ON THE SIDE ARE, ARE THE SAME AS THIS ONE AND THE SAME AS THE, THE, THE TWO SIDE WINDOWS THAT WE'RE GONNA KEEP ARE, THAT ARE ON THE SIDES TOWARD THE FRONT. THEY ARE STEEL, JUST LIKE THE ONES WE'RE SEEING RIGHT HERE. THEY'RE STILL CASEMENT WINDOWS. RIGHT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU'RE, YOU'RE REPLACING THESE TWO ON THE [02:05:01] SIDE SO THAT THEY COULD BE, UH, ACCESSIBLE FOR EMERGENCY, FOR EMERGENCY EGRESS. RIGHT? RIGHT. SO THE, THOSE, THOSE TWO BEDROOMS, WE WANNA REPLACE THOSE WINDOWS, UM, PARTLY FOR THAT TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT CODE FOR EMERGENCY RESCUE. UM, DO YOU HAVE A PLAN TO REUSE THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE PROPERTY? WE'RE GOING TO REUSE, UH, WHATEVER WE NEED TO FROM THESE TWO IN THE REAR AND FROM THE TWO ON THE SIDE. 'CAUSE THIS REAR FACADES BEING, BEING REMOVED FOR THE ADDITION AND THOSE TWO ON THE SIDE, AND WE'RE GONNA TAKE THE BEST PARTS OF TO PUT, TO PUT IN THE TWO, UH, THAT ARE EXISTING TO REMAIN ON THE SIDES. SO YOU'RE NOT LIKE, YOU'RE JUST TAKING PARTS OF IT. YOU'RE NOT REUSING THE WINDOWS THEMSELVES? CORRECT. WE'RE WE'RE, WE HAVE, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY ON, ON THE ADDITION, UH, FOR REAR SLIDING, SLIDING DOORS AND WHAT WE WANT TO USE ARE, ARE PRIVACY SECURE WINDOWS HERE. SO THE EXISTING WINDOWS TO REMAIN HERE MIGHT NEED SOME PARTS. AND, AND TO BE CLEAR, THE TWO FRONT ONES AS WELL, RIGHT, ARE STAYING, TWO FRONT ONES ARE STAYING, AND THE FIRST TWO AROUND THE CORNERS ARE STAYING. RIGHT. SO REASON WHY, THE REASON WHY YOU'RE REQUESTING REPLACEMENT IS TO ACCOMMODATE, ACCOMMODATE EGRESS, RIGHT? GOT IT. TO MAKE EMERGENCY, UH, ACCESS FOR THOSE TWO SLEEPING ROOMS. THAT'S THESE. SO THE, THE STAFF, UH, STIPULATION REGARDING WINDOWS IS A, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, A STANDARD STIPULATION THAT CALLS FOR DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS IN A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PROPERTY. OUR MID-CENTURY PROPERTY, UH, IS REALLY NOT APPLICABLE TO THAT 'CAUSE OF THE, THE, THE STYLE OF THE WINDOWS, THE STYLE OF THE DESIGN. UM, SO WE ARE LOOKING FOR, I GUESS, COMMISSION ACTION ON THAT AND OUR, OUR OVERALL WINDOW TREATMENT PLAN, APPROVAL OF THAT SHOW US THE ELEVATION OF THE BACK. SO THE PROPOSED OR THE EXISTING PROPOSED, OKAY, SO THIS IS THE REAR ELEVATION HAVE TWO, UH, SHED SHED STRUCTURE PORCHES COVERING, UH, BACK DOORS, SLIDING GLASS DOORS. SO SIMILAR TO THE EXISTING BUILDING, WHICH HAS TWO SLIDING GLASS DOORS ON IT. OUR NEW ADDITION IS GONNA HAVE TWO SLIDING GLASS DOORS ON IT. UH, BEFORE WE GET INTO FURTHER, UM, DISCUSSION ON THIS, I BELIEVE WE, THIS CITIZENS HEARD YES, TONY GARCIA. AND WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP, MR. VOGEL. OKAY. WE'LL GO THROUGH THE REST OF THOSE STIPULATIONS THEN. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS TONY GARCIA. I LIVE AT 2 43 EAST ATCH HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, AS WELL AS A MEMBER OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE SOME OF OUR EAST ATCH NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS TWO YEAR PROCESS. UH, PLEASE STAND. THANK YOU. THE A R C GENERALLY CONCURS WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION'S ORIGINAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN ITEMS ONE THROUGH FIVE. BUT WE BELIEVE THAT ITEM THREE SHOULD BE MORE INCLUSIVE. THE A R C A R C DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE INSTALLATION OF ROUNDED SKYLIGHTS ON THE REAR EDITION. THE SKYLIGHTS ON THE REAR EDITION WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AS WELL AS FROM THE ALLEY, WHICH IS CONSIDERED A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. UNDER THE U D C, WE REFER TO DRAWINGS X A B, WHICH I BELIEVE ARE SLIDES 62 AND AND 63, AND A 2 0 1, 2 0 1, WHICH IS SLIDE 66, WHICH SHOW THAT THESE ROOF ELEMENTS WOULD BE SEEN FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. IN ADDITION, STAFF DOES MAKE COMMENTS ON THE VISIBILITY IN THEIR FINDINGS. JAY, WE REQUEST THERE BE MORE CONSISTENCY IN THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WITH REGARDS TO ROOF ELEMENTS BEING OUT OF VIEW OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY FOR BOTH PRIMARY STRUCTURES AND ADDITIONS. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COMMISSION TO REQUIRE THAT THE ROUNDED SKYLIGHTS [02:10:01] BE REMOVED FROM THE REAR ADDITION. FINALLY, AFTER TWO YEARS OF DISCUSSION, WE DO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR THE AMENDED APPLICATION AND EXHIBITS. WE ASSUME THE APPLICANT WILL ACCEPT ALL THE STAFF'S ORIGINAL STIPULATIONS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE FULL SUPPORT OF THE MONTE VISTA HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. WE THANK THE COMMISSION FOR HEARING OUR REQUEST. OTHER CITIZENS LIKE TO ADDRESS THE OTHER STIPULATIONS IN THE YEAH, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS ABOUT SKYLIGHTS. I I THINK WE SHOULD JUST CONTINUE DOWN THE, THE FINDINGS. UH, SO WE WERE ON D FOR, UH, WINDOW REPLACEMENT, AND THEN WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT E UH, INSTALLATION OF NEW WINDOWS. UM, ITEM F IS, IS SKYLIGHTS ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, WHICH I GUESS IS THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. UM, AND SO WE, WE, WE HAVE PROPOSED SKYLIGHTS. UH, SKYLIGHTS ARE THE MOST EFFICIENT USE OF THE SUN'S ENERGY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE YOUR LIGHTS ON INSIDE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO AIR CONDITION TO COMPENSATE FOR THE HEAT GENERATED BY THE LIGHTS. WE THINK THAT THE ROUND SKYLIGHTS 14 INCH IN DIAMETER, UH, IS THE MOST, UH, IN INCONSPICUOUS TYPE. AND WE THINK IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE MID-CENTURY DESIGN OF THE HOUSE. UH, BECAUSE WE ARE PROPOSING A CONTINUATION OF THE EXISTING ROOF PLANE, WE FEEL IT'S CONSISTENT TO HAVE THEM BOTH ON THE ADDITION AND ON THE, UH, PRIMARY STRUCTURE. 'CAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALL IN THE SAME ROOF PLANE. UM, THEY'RE MINIMALLY VISIBLE. THE TWO VISUALIZATIONS THAT WERE REQUESTED THAT I PROVIDED ARE THE ABSOLUTE BEST POSSIBLE VIEW OF THE SKYLIGHTS YOU WOULD GET, AND IT WOULD BE A VERY QUICK PASSING VIEW AS YOU WALK DOWN THE STREET. UM, BARELY MAYBE SEE ONE OF 'EM IN THIS VIEW. UH, UH, FROM THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING, OBSERVING THE ORIGINAL 1950S HISTORIC MATERIAL AND, AND CHARACTER, YOU WILL NOT SEE ANY OF THE SKYLIGHTS. SO AGAIN, QUICK GLANCE BETWEEN THE TREES AND BEING IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, UM, THEY, THEY WOULD BE VISIBLE. WE WERE REQUEST THAT SPECIFICATION ON THE SKYLIGHTS, LIKE THE HEIGHT OF THEM. AND SO THEY HAVE, UH, THEY HAVE ABOUT A, A SIX INCH TALL A CURB. AND WHAT, WHAT WHAT I'VE MODELED IS, IS USING A, A ANGLED ONE, AND IT'S ACTUALLY FOR A STEEPER SLOPE, I THINK WE WOULD NOT BE USING THAT. SO IT WOULD BE EVEN MORE TIGHT TO, TO THE PLANE OF THE ROOF. SO THEY'RE ABOUT FOUR, FOUR OR FIVE INCHES UP. AND THEN THE PROFILE OF THE DOME IS, IS VERY LOW, TWO OR THREE INCHES. THEY'RE CALLED TUBULAR DAYLIGHT DEVICES. UH, SOLAR TUBE IS KIND OF THE MOST FAMOUS COMPANY, AND THEY, THEY'RE VERY EFFICIENT. UH, THE SKYLIGHT THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AS A LOWER, LOWER PROFILE THAN THE ONE ILLUSTRATED? YES, ACTUALLY THE, THE CURB, UH, THAT, THAT WE'RE SHOWING IN THE MODEL IS, IS UH, FOR A, UH, I THINK SIX AND 12 SLOPE ROOF. THIS IS A THREE AND A HALF AND 12 SLOPE. SO I DON'T THINK WE WOULD EVEN USE THAT ANGLED CURB. WE WOULD JUST USE ONE THAT'S TIGHT, TIGHT DOWN THE HEIGHT OF THE DOME ABOVE THE CURB. IS IT FLAT? IT'S ABOUT TWO OR THREE INCHES, I GUESS IT'S AN IMPORTANT FACTOR. MAYBE SOMETHING YOU CAN SUBMIT TO THAT. ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, YES, I CAN, I CAN GET YOU ABSOLUTE ALL THE DETAILS ON THAT, BUT THE CONCERN IS THE VISIBILITY, AND I THINK THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT POINT TO THE VISIBILITY IS THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THAT DOME. MM-HMM. OR EXACT OF THE SKYLIGHT, THE TOTAL. SURE. I CAN SEE THE ADVANTAGE OF SKYLIGHTS, UM, TO INVESTIGATE OTHER TYPES OF SKYLIGHTS SUCH AS THE, UH, FLAT SKYLIGHTS THAT FOLLOW THE SLOPE OF THE ROOF, LIKE A VEX OR A ONE OF THOSE TYPE. YEAH. SO MY, MY, UH, UH, MY THOUGHT IS THAT, THAT THE, THE SQUARE, UH, VIEWED, YOU KNOW, ON AN ANGLE YOU'RE GONNA SEE THE DIAGONAL WIDTH GROW THE, THE ROUND. IT'S 14 INCHES FROM ANY ANGLE THAT YOU VIEW IT. SO IT'S NOT ANY LARGER AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE VERY LOW PROFILE AND SMOOTH. UM, THE RARE ONES I THINK WOULD [02:15:01] BE MORE, MORE VISIBLE NOW. IT IS, IT IS A, A GEOMETRY OF, OF OF REC LINEARITY THAT, THAT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT SAY IS MORE RELATIONAL TO, TO THE BUILDING, BUT I THINK THE ROUND IS, IS MORE APPROPRIATE. WE'D BE HAPPY TO STUDY BOTH IF THAT WOULD, WOULD HELP. DO WE KNOW IF THERE'S A PRESIDENT OF SKYLINES, UH, SKYLIGHTS, I'M SORRY. IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? NO. AT ALL? NO. THERE'S REALLY NO PRECEDENT FOR THIS, THIS TYPE OF STRUCTURE BECAUSE IT'S THE UNIQUE, UH, 1950S TYPE BUILDING AND PRACTICALLY NONE IN THE, IN THAT VICINITY. SO IT, IT NEEDS ITS OWN TREATMENT PLAN. IT NEEDS ITS OWN ASSESSMENT. SO ANY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SKYLIGHT OR, OKAY. I IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO MAYBE PULL UP A CUT SHEET OF WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. THE FILE IS THE, REALLY THE ISSUE HERE WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH, WITH NEW ROOF ELEMENTS LIKE SOLAR PANELS AND STUFF, YOU KNOW, THE GUIDELINES SUGGEST A PROFILE THAT'S MINIMAL AND YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN WITH THE SKYLIGHT. I'M NOT PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE SHAPE OF IT OR NECESSARILY WHERE IT IS IT ON THE ROOF. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT ITS PROFILE AND ITS VISIBILITY FROM THIS JURY. OKAY. SO THE, THE, UM, THE GUIDELINES DO SPECIFICALLY REQUEST THAT ANY NEW, UM, SERVICES COMING THROUGH THE ROOF BE ON A BACK FACING OR A, A ROOF SLOPE THAT FACES AWAY FROM THE STREET. OUR BUILDING HAS TWO SLOPING ROOF FACES. NEITHER, NEITHER OF WHICH FACE AWAY FROM THE STREET. SO, SO ANY NEW PLUMBING VENTS, THEY'RE GONNA BE COMING THROUGH THE ROOF AS WELL. I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S TO BE EXPECTED. RIGHT. AND, UM, WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY BRING THOSE BACK. ALL OF OUR NEW, NEW PLUMBING, UH, EXCEPT FOR THE KITCHEN. ALL THE NEW RESTROOMS ARE IN THE ADDITION. SO THEY'LL ALL BE IN THE, THE ROOF OF THE ADDITION. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, I MEAN, MAYBE BASED ON YOUR INTERIOR PLAN IS WHERE THOSE SKYLIGHTS ARE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE NEED FOR HAVING THEM ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE MAYBE TO SHOW US GOOD QUESTION. MORE LIKE, YOU KNOW, I WOULD NOT BE CONCERNED MAYBE ON THE ADDITION BECAUSE IT'S LESS VISIBLE, BUT I DO SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF THE CONCERN. AND I WOULD ALSO SEE, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE, IT WAS VERY VAGUE DESCRIPTION OF THE SKYLIGHT, LIKE ME MORE SPECIFIC ON THE TYPE AND HOW MUCH THEY WOULD PROTRUDE OVER THAT. UM, I, I DO AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER THAT IS A LOT OF FLAT OPTIONS THAT ARE ACTUALLY GIVE THE SAME, UM, IDEA OF A, OF THE LIGHT GOING IN. AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME MORE OPTIONS. SO, UH, MORE THAN A DOME. BUT IF YOU SAY IT'S NOT VERY TALL, MAYBE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE DETAILS ON THAT AND, AND, AND MORE WHY ON THAT PRIMARY STRUCTURE? WHERE IS IT EXACTLY THAT YOU WANT THEM? GOOD QUESTION. I'LL JUST, UH, KIND OF JUMP IN ON THIS A LITTLE BIT THAT I, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SOLAR TUBES. I USED THEM ON THE HAVEN FOR HOPE TO, TO ILLUMINATE, UH, A NUMBER OF THE, THE, THE DEEP INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS THAT WE'RE CONVERTING TO THE, UH, HOMELESS ASSISTANCE CENTER THERE. AND THEY COME VERY LOW PROFILED. AND SO I THINK IF YOU COULD GET REALLY SPECIFIC WITH, WITH STAFF ON WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING PRODUCT WISE THERE, IT MIGHT BE MORE ACCEPTABLE. AND THEY HAVE THEM WHERE THEY'RE NOT JUST, UH, EMERGING OUT, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE SLICED AT AN ANGLE THAT IS, IS COMMENSURATE TO THE ANGLE OF THE ROOF. SO IT HAS A CONSISTENT REVEAL, RIGHT? SO IT'S ACTUALLY SIT RIGHT ON IT A, UM, ELLIPSE IN SECTION RATHER THAN A CIRCLE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. WHEN YOU START SLICING ACROSS A, A, UH, A CYLINDER, YOU GET AN ELLIPSE. UM, SO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND, UM, BUT I I, I DO THINK THEY'RE VERY EFFECTIVE IN, IN A WAY OF ILLUMINATING INTERIOR SPACES LIKE THIS. THE, THE SKYLIGHT ON THE, ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS IN THE, THE KITCHEN AREA. SO SORT OF AN INTERIOR PORTION AND THEN THE TWO ON THE ADDITION ARE IN THE ONE'S IN A BATHROOM AND ONE'S IN THE, THE HALLWAY, WHICH IS THE LAUNDRY. YEP. COULD YOU JUMP ONTO, AND I'VE, I'VE ACTUALLY BEEN FOLLOWING YOU THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THROUGH THE ITEMS RATHER THAN THE INDIVIDUAL FINDINGS. UH, COULD YOU GO TO ITEM FOUR NOW THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE SKYLIGHTS UP ON THE, THE SCREEN IS AN EXAMPLE OF ONE TYPE WHERE IT'S, UH, THE DOME IS PARALLEL TO THE ROOF PLANE AS OPPOSED TO, UH, LAST YES. AND THAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M PROPOSING. THE ONE ON THE LEFT, UH, REALIZING THAT OUR, OUR MODEL ELEMENT IS, IS USING THE ONE ON THE RIGHT, BUT IT'S, IT'S [02:20:01] FOR A STEEP SLOPE AND THAT'S WHY IT GETS OFF LEVEL. IS THAT THE SPECIFIC ONE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? 'CAUSE THEY, THEY HAVE SOME THAT HAVE VERY LOW PROFILES AND STUFF KIND OF BUBBLE IN. YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE ALMOST A FLAT LENS ON THEM. THIS WAS JUST ONE EXAMPLE THAT I FOUND QUICKLY. I THINK THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO SHOW US EXACTLY WHAT HE'S PROPOSING AND, UH, WHAT WE COMING UP WITH IDEAS HERE. YEAH, I'LL DO THAT. I'M A LITTLE BIT WORRIED ABOUT THOSE CASEMENT WINDOWS THAT YOU'RE REMOVING AND NOT, UH, THAT YOU WANNA REPLACE. I'M NOT SO MUCH, UM, WORRIED ABOUT THE REPLACEMENT. I MEAN, I DO SEE THE NEED FOR THE EMERGENCY EXIT, BUT, UM, I WAS, YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO EXPLORE IF WE CAN REUSE THOSE WINDOWS SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE PROPERTY. MM-HMM. . YEAH. UM, UNFORTUNATELY THERE'S NO PLACE IN THE PROJECT FOR ANOTHER, UH, LARGE STEEL CASEMENT WINDOW OTHER THAN THE TWO EXISTING LOCATIONS THAT, THAT WE'RE, UH, PROPOSING. AND THEN THE TWO BEDROOMS WHERE WE, WHERE WE NEED THE, THE MODERN, UH, CODE COMPLIANT. I, I'M SENSITIVE TO THE EGRESS SITUATION HERE AND I DON'T OBJECT TO THE, AND THE APPLICANT IS REMOVING FOUR TOTAL TO WHERE THE ADDITION IS GOING, AND THEN THE TWO IN THE TWO BEDROOMS AND, AND FROM EIGHT GOING DOWN TO FOUR AND THEN REMOVING FOUR. I MEAN, WE COULD SAVE THEM AND IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT COULD BE REVERSED SOMETIME. IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO RESTORE THE 1950S BUILDING, WE COULD ALSO, UM, OFFER 'EM TO SALVAGE. YEAH. FOR USE, GOING TO CODE COMPLIANT WINDOWS FOR THE, THE BEDROOM AREAS. I DO NOT HAVE AN ISSUE WITH. WE, WE, WE PREVIOUSLY WERE, WE'RE USING TWO OF THEM IN THE OTHER PROJECT WHERE WE COULD AND, AND 'CAUSE WE HAD THE, UH, THE, UH, EMERGENCY ACCESS WINDOWS. SO LET ME ASK YOU AGAIN, 'CAUSE I WANT TO GUESS, MOVING ALONG HERE TO ITEM FOUR, WHICH, UH, TALKS ABOUT A COUPLE OF STIPULATIONS AND YOU MADE AN INTERESTING CONVERSA, YOU KNOW, UM, POINTS ABOUT THE VERTICAL VERSUS HORIZONTAL, UH, HORIZONTAL ELEMENTS WITHIN THE SORT OF MID-CENTURY MODERN VOCABULARY MM-HMM. , UM, FOR THE, THE, THE TRANSOM WINDOWS THAT ARE ABOVE THE OPERABLE, UH, CASEMENT WINDOWS ON THE FRONT. THERE ARE, AND THIS IS TYPICAL OF ALL OF THEM OF THIS GENRE, THEY HAVE DIVIDING MILLIONS THAT HELP TO BREAK DOWN THE, UH, THE TRANSOM. UM, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY YOU COULD ADD A COUPLE MORE TRANS, UH, SORRY, A COUPLE MORE, UH, MUTTON BARS TO THOSE TO GIVE THAT SORT OF BROKEN DOWN RHYTHM RATHER THAN THE LONG, YOU KNOW, RETAIN IT AS A HORIZONTAL BUT THEN BREAK THEM DOWN WITH VERTICAL MUCH LIKE THE, UH, THE ONES OVER THE, OVER THE, UH, OKAY, SO THERE, THERE IS A, A CENTER, UH, MULIAN IN HERE. SO IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A ONE TO THREE, UH, PROPORTION HERE. AND I THINK, UM, A THREE TO ONE. SO THE THREE TO ONE IS THIS IS, IS ONE SIDE OF IT. AND, AND, AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS COULD YOU BREAK IT DOWN TO, TO, INTO THREE LIGHTS RATHER THAN TWO TO GET IT SOMETHING CLOSER TO WHAT YOU HAVE ABOVE THE EXISTING CASEMENTS ON THE FRONT? YEAH, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION THAT I'VE, I'VE LOOKED FOR THOSE, THOSE PRODUCTS THAT, THAT I HAVEN'T, HAVEN'T FOUND. UM, I THINK IT WOULD HAVE TO BE, UM, THE CAN. OH, SO HERE, HERE'S THE ONE THAT, CAN YOU SEE WHAT MY NOTE IS ON THERE? PROPORTION HERE IS, IS A, UM, 1.2 TO ONE AND A 1.8 TO ONE. SO, UM, SO THEY'RE LESS HORIZONTAL THAN THIS ONE. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT RIGHT, MR. CARPENTER? CERTAINLY THAT, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY BECAUSE ALL WE NEED TO DO IS, IS MAKE THIS A, A SHORTER AND AND HORIZONTAL LENGTH AND THOSE ARE AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW, THIS IS A ROUGH OPENING OF TWO FOOT BY SIX FOOT, SO WE CAN GET THE SAME IN A, IN A 2, 5, 5 FOOT. AND IF, IF THAT'S THE PROPORTION, UH, THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GO FOR MORE ACCURATELY, WE COULD DO THAT QUITE EASILY. YES. YEAH, I DON'T, [02:25:01] I'M JUST ADVOCATING IF YOU CAN FIND THE PRODUCT TO, YOU KNOW, SUBDIVIDE THOSE WINDOWS DOWN FURTHER. SO, SO ONE BEGINS TO PROCEED THEM AS SORT OF THREE, UH, YEAH. A TRIPLETT OF LIGHTS RATHER THAN MORE OF A BUNKER, HORIZONTAL TYPE OF, UH, FENESTRATION. OKAY. UM, THAT'S INTERESTING 'CAUSE THAT, THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS SET FORWARD IN THAT OTHER FILE THAT, THAT WE PULLED UP EARLIER. DO YOU STILL HAVE THAT, UM, ALTERNATIVE? SO I WAS LOOKING AT THREE, UM, THREE IN THIS CASE, UM, BASEMENT OPENINGS. UM, BUT TO ME THE, WHERE IT DIDN'T WORK, IT, IT, IT, IT, IT'D PROBABLY HAVE TO BE TWO. WAS THIS NOT SOMETHING FROM THE FIRST THAT WAS SOME OF THE WINDOWS THAT YOU USED ON THE FIRST, UH, I MEAN PREVIOUS PROJECT, PREVIOUS PROJECT? NO, IT'S NOT, NO. THIS, THIS WAS DEVELOPED SINCE WE MET WITH THE DRC TO TRY TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES FOR I LIKE THAT IDEA FOR THE WINDOW PROPORTIONS. I, I HAVE JUST A, I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION. I DO THINK THE, THAT THE THREE BAYS ARE PROBABLY MORE SYMPATHETIC, THE, THE THREE LIGHTS. UM, ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT THESE ARE THREE DIFFERENT ALTOGETHER OR IS THIS JUST A BIGGER PIECE? IT IT'S, IT'S THREE SEPARATE UNITS. YEAH. SEE, I THINK THAT THAT'S THE WAY THAT COMES. I THINK THAT KIND OF FALLS SHORT OF WHAT'S, I, I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE PROPORTIONAL GAME THAT ARE, ARE, UM, UH, RIGOR THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOING THROUGH HERE. BUT I THINK IF YOU COULD FIND A SINGLE UNIT THAT THEN HAD THREE MUTTON BARS IN IT TO BE MUCH CLOSER TO THE EXISTING, UH, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST TAKE ITS CUES AND BE MORE SYMPATHETIC TO THE EXISTING TRANSOMS ABOVE THE, THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT, IT'D BE MORE SUCCESSFUL. IT'S GONNA START GETTING VERY CLUNKY WHEN YOU START MULLING TOGETHER THREE SEPARATE UNITS. ADDITIONAL QUESTION ABOUT THESE WINDOWS, IS THIS THE COMPOSITE MATERIAL THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER? OR IS THIS ALUMINUM CLA WOOD? IT'S A COMPOSITE. SO ALL OF THE NEW WINDOWS ARE THE COMPOSITE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. AND THE REASON WHY YOU EXPLAINED TO US YOU FELT THAT WAS THE MOST APPROPRIATE IS IT HAD PROFILES THAT BEST CAPTURED THE EXISTING WINDOW PROFILES, PARTICULARLY, RIGHT? IT'S THE, IT IS THE, THE PRO, THE, UM, PRODUCT THAT I FOUND THAT HAD THE MOST NARROW, ESPECIALLY THE CENTER MULIAN BETWEEN THE TWO GLIDING PIECES AND, AND THE MOST NARROW PROFILE AROUND THE EDGE. AND I'VE GOT A SKETCH THAT, UM, THAT SHOWS IN PROFILE THE EXISTING THANK YOU. SHE HAS THAT, UH, SO AT THE BOTTOM IS THE EXISTING CASEMENT, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A TWO AND AN EIGHTH PROFILE THERE, INCH AND SEVEN EIGHTHS IN THE, IN THE MULLINS. AND, AND SO WE FOUND AS CLOSE AS WE CAN TO THAT TWO AND THREE SIXTEENTHS IN THIS CENTER ONE, AND THIS ONE'S THREE AND AN EIGHTH PROFILE OVER HERE. BUT IT IS BROKEN UP INTO SMALLER PIECES AND THAT'S SMALLER. THOSE ARE SMALLER DIMENSIONS THAN YOU WOULD NORMALLY FIND IN ALUMINUM. CLA WOOD, YES, IT'S, THESE ARE SMALLER THAN, THAN ANY OTHER, UH, PRODUCT. SO I SAY IT'S REALLY RARE THAT I, I WOULD GET BEHIND A COMPOSITE PRO, UH, A COMPOSITE PRODUCT, BUT, UH, I, UH, I, I CAN AGREE WITH YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS AS AN APPROPRIATE ALTERNATIVE GIVEN THE DIMENSIONS AND THE AGE OF THE HOUSE, AND I WOULD SUPPORT, SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. AT, AT RISK OF MAYBE CUTTING SOMEBODY OFF, I THINK I'M GONNA TRY, TRY FOR A MOTION, UNLESS THERE'S, IF I COULD MAKE A COMMENT QUICKLY, PLEASE. YES, OF COURSE. UM, ON YOUR SHEET AS 1 0 1, WHICH IS LABELED A SITE PLAN, I ASSUME THAT YOU'RE ALSO CALLING THAT A LANDSCAPE PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. THE, THE LANDSCAPE APPROACH NOW IS TO MAINTAIN AND RESTORE THE EXISTING LAWN AREAS AND TO PLANT TEXAS RED BUDS WHERE WE'VE SHOWN TREES, THE NEW TREES. OKAY. THAT WAS ONE OF MY POINTS THAT, UH, WHAT APPEARED TO BE NEW TREES. THERE'S NO LABELING ON WHAT THEY ARE, WHAT SIZE THEY ARE AS WOULD BE TYPICAL WITH THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. YES. SO THE, THE, THE LATEST PLAN WHICH GOT LEFT WAS, WAS NOT THERE, IS IS HERE NOW AND, AND IN FRONT OF YOU. AND, AND THE SIZE OF THE RED BUD TREES WE DID NOT DELINEATE. UH, BUT THE LOCATION AND THE, THE OTHER PLANTING, UH, OF THIS EXISTING BED, UH, IS, IS SHOWN NOW, ARE YOU PLANNING ON DOING ANY OTHER LANDSCAPING AS WOULD BE TYPICAL, UH, SHRUB BEDS [02:30:01] SO FORTH? NO, NO, NO OTHER PLANTING IS PLANNED OTHER THAN WHAT WE'VE SHOWN. THIS IS AN EXISTING, UM, I THINK BARR, PIT OF SWARM. AND THEN THIS IS AN EXISTING BED AREA THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, UM, TWO PLANT MATERIALS FOR MEXICAN FEATHER GRASS AND AUTUMN SAGE. AND THAT'S IN THIS AREA RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE, UH, OF THE, UH, FOUNDATION. OKAY. I HADN'T SEEN THAT BEFORE. THANK YOU. I UNDERSTAND. THAT'S ALRIGHT. I'M GONNA ATTEMPT A MOTION HERE. UM, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE AND TWO AS PROPOSED. I'LL SECOND IT. OH, LET, HANG ON. GOT A FEW MORE ITEMS HERE. UH, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL ON ITEMS ONE AND TWO IS PROPOSED ITEM THREE. UM, I'D MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH A STIPULATION THAT THE SKYLIGHT, UH, THE LOW PROFILE THAT DOESN'T EXCEED, I'M GONNA PUT A NUMBER AT IT SO STAFF CAN APPROVE IT IF IT MEETS THAT NUMBER. BUT LET'S SAY IT DOESN'T EXCEED NINE INCHES IN HEIGHT. SORRY, I MEANT TO THE, YOU CAN ASK FOR AN AMENDMENT. UM, YES, PLEASE. UM, APPROVAL OF ITEM FOUR, UH, WITH STIPULATION THREE, APPROVAL OF ITEM FIVE A SECOND. AND I OFFERED A, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FOR THE, UH, ITEM FOUR, SORRY, ITEM THREE. THAT, UH, THE HEIGHT DOES NOT EXCEED, UH, SIX INCHES. THAT PERMITS YOU TO HAVE A FOUR INCH CURB AND SOME MATERIAL FOR THE, THE FRAME OF THE SKYLIGHT. I ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO, I, I MINIMIZE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. I DON'T EVEN WANNA PUT A NUMBER, BUT FOR THE STAFF ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, I THINK IT'S MOST IMPORTANT ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. I I THOUGHT HE HAD SAID IT WAS A THREE INCH SKYLIGHT, THE ONE YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? UM, NO, TWO TO THREE INCHES. I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY THE DOME. NO, I WAS SPEAKING OF THE CURB, THE CURBING, AND THEN THE, THE PROTRUSION ABOVE THE CURB OF THE DOME. BUT I SHOULDN'T SAY ANY NUMBER REALLY UNTIL I GET THOSE SPECIFICATIONS. I ACTUALLY DO AGREE THAT MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T EITHER DO A NUMBER. YEAH, NO NUMBER. I THINK THE ATTEMPT IS TO GIVE STAFF SOME KIND OF, UM, YOU KNOW, EMPIRICAL NUMBER TO GO BY HERE. I HAVE AN IDEA, UH, BY WHICH TO AMEND THIS, UH, I DID, I THINK I REACHED FOR, I'M THINKING OF SOLAR PANELS OR SOMETHING. UH, I'M GONNA AMEND MY MOTION, UH, TO DENY ITEM THREE SO THAT YOU GET APPROVAL ON EVERYTHING ELSE AND YOU CAN COME BACK WITH A SPECIFICATION THAT WE CAN CONSIDER FOR THAT AT A FUTURE DATE. COMMISSIONER, I WOULD SECOND THAT I BEFORE YOU SECOND. CAN YOU CLARIFY YOUR MOTION? 'CAUSE WE WENT BACK AND FORTH WITH A COUPLE, UM, AMENDMENTS. SO AS WE HAVE IT, WE HAD AN A MOTION AND SECOND, BUT THEN HE WENT BACK AND AMENDED IT AND THEN HE WENT BACK AND AMENDED IT. THE COMMISSIONER AMENDED IT. SO CAN WE, I'M LET, THERE WERE, THERE WAS DISCUSSION FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS ABOUT A POSSIBLE AMENDMENT. THAT WAS THE ONLY AMENDMENT I MADE WAS TO DENY ITEM THREE, I WITHDRAW MY AMENDMENTS. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION TO COLLEAGUE HERE. UH, THERE'S A MINIMUM STANDARD FOR THE SPEC OF, UH, GIVEN SKYLIGHT, RIGHT? IS IT POSSIBLE TO, UH, STIPULATE THE, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED BY THE MINIMUM OF THE SPEC OF THE SKYLIGHT? THAT'S WHERE I WAS ATTEMPTING TO GO WHEN IT FAILED SPECTACULARLY. SO BY SAYING THAT THERE IS NO MINIMUM SPEC EDUCATION BECAUSE SKYLIGHTS ARE NOT APPROVED NO, NO MINIMUM SPEC OF THE PRODUCT OF THE SKYLIGHT. WELL, BECAUSE THE NUMBER ONE, THE NUMBER ONE OBJECTIVE OF THE SKYLIGHT, WELL THE NUMBER ONE, THE NUMBER TWO OBJECTIVE OF THE SKYLIGHT PRODUCT IS TO KEEP WATER OUT. SO THERE'S A CURB THAT IS MINIMUM, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH HOW TALL IT IS. IT HAS TO DO WITH WHAT KEEPS WATER OUT. SO THAT MAY VARY BY MANUFACTURER, RIGHT? BUT, BUT IF, IF THE, IF THERE'S A WAY TO SAY TO STATE THE MINIMUM, [02:35:01] THEN HE WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK IF IT WAS BY SPEC. SO IT MEANS THAT THE PRODUCT WOULD HAVE ITS MINIMUM. BUT I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE MOTION THAT COMMISSIONER FISH JUST SAID ABOUT DENYING THREE AND COMING BACK. I WOULD SECOND THAT. I CONCUR JUST BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH VARIATION FROM PRODUCT TO PRODUCT, UH, THAT WE'D REALLY NEED TO GET A SPECIFIC PRODUCT FIRST THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES AND THEN WE COULD SAY WHATEVER THE MINIMUM IS THAT THE INSTALLATION, UH, GUIDE IS FOR THAT, UH, MANUFACTURER FOR THAT PRODUCT. FOR, FOR, FOR THE, JUST THE CLARITY ON THE RECORD, I'M GONNA RESTATE MY AMENDED MOTION AND SEEK A SECOND ON THAT. IT'S NOT A NEW MOTION, IT'S JUST RESTATING THE AMENDED MOTION. UH, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL ON ITEMS ONE AND TWO AS PROPOSED DENIAL OF ITEM THREE, APPROVAL OF ITEM FOUR WITH STIPULATION THREE AND APPROVAL OF ITEM FIVE. SECOND. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND. FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. I'LL OPPOSE SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL. AND WE THANK THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER FOR THEIR PATIENTS AND WORKING WITH THE, UH, COMMUNITY AND THE, THE CITY STAFF AND COMMISSION TO GET A PROJECT. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS FOR BEING HERE. [B-12 19-6585 Address/Description: 2054 W MULBERRY AVE HDRC Case No.: 2019-484 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: Office of Historic Preservation Request: Recommendation to the Building Standards Board City Council Dist.: 7] AGENDA ITEM B 12 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 19 4 84, UH, 2054 WEST MULBERRY. THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS REQUESTING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD FOR THE DEMOLITION OF A REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT 2054. WEST MULBERRY STAFF RECOMMENDS IN KIND REPAIR OF THE STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDINGS A, C AND D. UM, WE DO NOT HAVE CODE ENFORCEMENT STAFF HERE TO PRESENT THE CASE LIKE WE NORMALLY WOULD. UM, BUT WE ARE COMFORTABLE ENTERTAINING A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION. I'LL COMMENT ON THIS. UM, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A BLOCK AWAY FROM MY HOUSE AND I'VE SEEN THIS HOUSE MANY, MANY, MANY TIMES. UM, CAN STEPH, I MEAN I'M, I'M ASSUMING THIS IS A CODE COMPLIANCE CASE 'CAUSE IT IS KIND OF A PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN CALLED ON I THINK SEVERAL TIMES. IT IS. AND SO IT'S BEEN SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING BY THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD. AND SO AS PART OF THE PROCESS AND A HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE'RE ASKING FOR HRCS RECOMMENDATION THERE. ANY HISTORICAL DO WE HAVE, I I I DIDN'T SEE IT HERE OR MAYBE I MISSED IT. ANY HISTORIC, LIKE OTHER KINDS OF THE CALLS FROM THAT CODE COMPLIANCE? LIKE WHAT KIND OF A CONCERNS THERE HAVE BEEN? OR IS IT? YES. UM, GIMME JUST A SECOND. WE'LL SCROLL DOWN. THEY HAD GIVEN US, UM, THEY REPORT, HAVE THEY NOTED THAT, UM, SCROLL UP. UM, THEY NOTED THAT THE ROOF IS SAGGING, OVERHANGS DETERIORATED, WINDOWS ARE DAMAGED, UM, FOUNDATION IS COMPROMISED. AND THEN, UM, IN MY EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT, THEY DID, UM, SHARE WITH ME THAT THE CASE HAS BEEN ONGOING SINCE PROBABLY 2016. AND IT DID GO TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD FOR AN ORDER FOR REPAIR THAT THE OWNER DID NOT COMPLY WITH. UM, AND IT DID GO, I THINK TO MUNICIPAL COURT WITH NO ACTION. AND SO THEY'RE AT THE POINT NOW WHERE GONNA GO BACK. BUT LET ME PUT A LITTLE BIT, I MEAN, WHAT I'VE SEEN, UM, IN THE TIME THAT I'VE LIVED IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, I'VE SEEN THIS PROPERTY, YES, BECOME KIND OF A SUBJECT TO, I MEAN THERE'S, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY INTENTIONS OF, FROM THE OWNER'S SIDE, IT DOESN'T SHOW EITHER ON PRIMARY STRUCTURE, ON THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. THIS IS ON LAKE, WHICH IS OUR MAIN THOROUGH, ONE OF THE MAIN THIRDS, AND IT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SCHOOL, THE YOUNG WOMEN'S ACADEMY, IF YOU LOOK UP ON THE MAP. SO I MEAN, A LOT OF EVERY DAY THERE'S CARS PARKED THERE OF PARENTS PICKING UP THEIR CHILDREN. THERE'S ACTUALLY A SIGN THAT THE OWNER OF THAT HOUSE CANNOT PARK ON THE STREET IN FRONT OF HIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO A CERTAIN TIMEFRAME DURING THE DAY FROM PICKUP. AND SO ALL CARS HAVE TO BE GONE. THE, THE WHERE I'M TORN, AND I'M KIND OF DISAPPOINTED THAT MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MAYBE DIDN'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS, IS THAT THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MATCHES THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IN THE ARCHITECTURAL. AND I DO FEEL LIKE MAYBE THIS COM [02:40:01] AND, AND THE REPORT I WAS LOOKING FOR IS NOT SO MUCH, I THINK ALL THIS IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, IT'S VERY VISIBLE, ALL THREE SIDES OF THE HOME OF THAT, UH, BUILDING. I MEAN, YES, THERE'S CLEAR SIGNS OF, I MEAN SOME ROOF SAGGING AND WINDOWS AND DOORS AND WOOD ROT AND ET CETERA. BUT I DO FEEL THAT, I MEAN, STAFF DOES HAVE A POINT, YOU KNOW, PER THE GUIDELINES, THIS IS REPAIRABLE. I JUST FEEL LIKE IF WE WERE TO GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THIS PROPERTY'S GONNA STAY LIKE IT IS FOR A WHILE AND THIS IS GONNA BE KEEP BECOMING A PROBLEM FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, I DON'T IF THIS WERE TO BE DEMOLISHED, IS THAT SOMETHING THE OWNER HAS TO PAY FOR OR WOULD THE CITY GO PAY FOR THAT IF THE CITY DEMOLISHED IT? A LIEN WOULD BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY. A LIEN WILL BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY. THAT'S CORRECT. IF CODE OF, IF THE CITY ISSUES A DEMOLITION ORDER, THEN A LIEN WOULD BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD THEN BE RESPONSIBLE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN PULL IT UP, BUT THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE LOOKS ALMOST THE SAME STATE THAT THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS. SO IT'S MAYBE JUST, UM, YOU CAN SEE IT'S VERY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. HAS THERE BEEN ANY ATTEMPT ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER TO SEEK A DEMOLITION PERMIT? UM, NOT THAT STAFF IS AWARE OF, NO. I MEAN, I I I'M IN A POSITION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HERE. UM, IF THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS INTERESTED IN, UH, MAKING A CASE FOR ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OR DEMONSTRATING A LOSS OF SIGNIFICANCE, UH, THAT COULD HAPPEN AT A LATER DATE. LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY. THE OWNER HAS NO INTENT OF DOING ANYTHING AND DOES NOT WANNA DEMOLISH IT, DOES NOT WANNA DO ANY REPAIRS OR THAT'S, I THINK, THE REASON WHY CODE COMPLIANCE IS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE. SO I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD EX I MEAN, AND IT'S JUST AN ASSUMPTION. MAYBE WE CAN GIVE IT A TRY, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE ON THE HISTORY OF THE CODE COMPLIANCE CALLS, AND I'VE SEEN THEM, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. IF WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR DEMOLITION, THE CITY WOULD ACTUALLY BE INVOLVED IN THE DEMOLITION POTENTIALLY. I MEAN, SO AN ORDER WOULD BE ISSUED AND SO THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO DO IT THEMSELVES. IF THEY DON'T, THEN EVENTUALLY THAT ORDER NEEDS TO BE CARRIED OUT AND SO THE CITY WILL DO IT AND PLACE A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY. THERE'S NO MECHANISM HERE WHERE WE CAN SET CLAIM A DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT. THEY NEED TO MAINTAIN THIS. UM, POTENTIALLY WE COULD FILE A CASE. UM, AT THIS POINT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A SIMILAR PROCESS FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURES FOR ACCESSORIES, NOT SO MUCH. SO WE DON'T TAKE ACTION. WE HAVE TO TAKE ACTION RIGHT? EITHER WAY. YEAH. 'CAUSE IT'S ESSENTIALLY, IT'S, IT'S GOING TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD AT SOME POINT. AND SO THE ACTION BY THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE PART OF THEIR CASE FILE AND OUR STAFF WOULD BE AT THAT MEETING TO ANSWER THE BOARD'S QUESTIONS. SO WE COULD ACTUALLY, UM, RECOMMEND A DEMOLITION WITH STIPULATIONS. YES, WE WOULD THEN SHARE THAT WITH THE BOARD, UH, BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD. WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT IS THE, UM, AND THIS IS, AND I THINK ALL YOU COMMISSIONERS KNOW ME VERY WELL THAT I'M AGAINST DEMOLISHING ANYTHING. UM, IT'S ON THE PRIME FAIR AND THERE'S A SCHOOL ACROSS THE STREET AND, AND THIS PROPERTY, I MEAN THE, THE WAY THAT IT HAS SHOWN THE LAST MAY, I MEAN AT LEAST FIVE TO SIX YEARS OF THE KEEP UPKEEP OF THIS PROPERTY. IT'S NOT, THERE'S NOT SOME, IT'S NOT SHOWING ANY REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO IT. AND THAT'S WORRYING ME WHAT'S GONNA BE NEXT AND BEING SO CLOSE TO THE SCHOOL AND ON THE STREET. I MEAN, EVERYONE THAT COMES FOR 4TH OF JULY FIREWORKS WALK DOWN THIS STREET, I ASK THIS OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER WITH HER FAMILIARITY OF THE OWNER. IS THIS A, ARE THERE ANY MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AS SUCH AS ELDERLY WIDOW, THAT KIND OF THING THAT, UH, HAS THIS PROPERTY IS FALLING TO SEED OR IS IT JUST A NEGLECTED, UH, PROPERTY OWNER? I DUNNO, WITH THE EXACT DETAILS. UH, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THE PERSON LIVING IN THERE [02:45:01] OWNS IT OR RENTS IT. I WOULDN'T KNOW. 'CAUSE I, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF, OF, UM, PAST FINDINGS FOR THE VERY REASON MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS SAID I'D BE BE OPPOSED TO SORT OF CONTRIBUTING TO AN INEVITABLE, YOU KNOW, DEMOLITION MOVEMENT HERE. IF THERE WAS ANY WAY TO SAY, TO BE, UH, REPAIRED IN KIND EITHER BY THIS OWNER, BY A FUTURE OWNER, I'D RATHER SEE IT THERE. UM, UH, RATHER THAN JUST SORT OF DISAPPEAR WITHOUT ANY KIND OF EFFORT TO, TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES. JUST A QUESTION FOR STAFF. DOES THIS, THIS THEN GOES TO CO COMPLIANCE, THEN HAS TO TAKE ACTION IN TERMS OF ITS FATE? UM, CORRECT. AND SO AFTER, AFTER IT COMES TO THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, UM, THEN CODE ENFORCEMENT, IF THEY DO TAKE IT BEFORE THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD, THIS WILL BE PART OF, UM, PART OF THE, UH, THE RECORD. AND OUR STAFF WILL BE THERE TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS AND, YOU KNOW, SHARE THE COMMISSION'S ACTION ON THAT. WOULD IT, WOULD IT BE, UM, AN ASSUMPTION? RIGHT, BUT, BUT, BUT A MORE ACCURATE ASSUMPTION TO, TO SAY THAT IF, IF, IF THIS COMMISSION MADE A MOTION TO DEMOLISH, THERE WOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE IF THAT MOTION HAPPENED ON THE OTHER END OF CODE COMPLIANCE. RIGHT? I MEAN, IF IT'S GONNA GO TO CODE COMPLIANCE AND THEY'RE GONNA DECIDE TO, TO DEMOLISH IT DOESN'T NEED THIS COMMISSION TO MAKE A DECISION ON DEMOLISHING, RIGHT? UM, I MEAN, AS PART OF THE PROCESS, WE, WE STILL NEED THE RECOMMENDATION AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN CERTAINLY ADVOCATE FOR REPAIRS. UM, BUT RIGHT, RIGHT. BUT IF THERE WAS NO MOTION HERE, THE COMMISSION, THEN THERE WOULD BE NO DECISION. WE, WE CAN'T SPECULATE WHAT THE OUTCOME WOULD BE. NO, NO. I KNOW THAT IT WOULD VERY LIKELY BE APPROVED FOR DEMOLITION WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION FROM THIS BODY. SO A DECISION WOULD BE MADE BY BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THAT, THAT A MOTION TO DEMOLISH HERE IS NOT REALLY NECESSARY. IT IS NECESSARY. SO IT WOULDN'T BE THE FINAL ACTION IT WOULD INFORM, YEAH, THE B S B MAY TAKES THE FINAL ACTION. IT, IT WOULD INFORM, BUT THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THE H D R C IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH A, WITH AN APPLICATION HERE THAT SAYS CONTRIBUTING SIGNIFICANCE WOULD, WOULD BE SAYING TO DEMOLISH WHEN IT DOESN'T REALLY NEED TO SAY TO DEMOLISH A SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE BECAUSE DECISION WOULD BE INEVITABLE WITHOUT THIS DECISION TO DEMOLISH HERE. RIGHT. JUST SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD'VE TO CARRY THE BURDEN OF THAT DECISION. RIGHT. SO ULTIMATELY IT'S THE B S B HAS COMPLETE AUTHORITY OVER THE DEMOLITION ORDER. THE H C R C CANNOT ISSUE A DEMOLITION ORDER, BUT BECAUSE IT'S IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND IT'S GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING FOR A RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS COMMISSION TO INFORM THE B S B PROCESS. SO, SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S PARTICULAR CONCERN ABOUT A POTENTIAL OUTCOME AND, UH, I I, I FEEL LIKE I'M GOING TO SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. I I MOVE FOR ADOPTION OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION. SECOND, JUST WANNA SAY TO MY COMMISSIONERS, I, I'M, I THINK THIS CONVERSATION THAT WE JUST HAD IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DID COMMENT ON IT AND WE JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION. WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. I'LL OPPOSE SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. [B-13 19-6641 Address/Description: 323 LEIGH ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-470 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Desiree Williams Request: Window replacement City Council Dist.: 1 ] AND AS A REMINDER, ITEM B 13 H T R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 7 0 ADDRESS 3 23 LAY STREET HAS BEEN POSTPONED BY THE APPLICANT. [B-14 19-6668 Address/Description: 127 E MISTLETOE HDRC Case No.: 2019-490 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: E.C. Parker Request: Construction of a rear addition, garage modifications, hardscaping modifications City Council Dist.: 1] MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM B 14 H C R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 9 0 ADDRESS, 1 27 EAST MISSILE TOE. THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS STAFF STIPULATION, EXCUSE ME, STAFF STIPULATIONS REGARDING THE GARAGE DOORS FOR THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THE WIDENING OF THE DRIVEWAY, AND THE PROPOSAL TO INSTALL A LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON THE PROPERTY. HEY COMMISSIONERS. UM, SO I SENT OVER A P D F. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S MADE ITS WAY. INTRODUCE YOURSELF PLEASE. SURE. MY NAME IS CHRIS WHITWORTH. I CURRENTLY LIVE AT THE PROPERTY. SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING, UM, A LOT WITH THE MONTE VISTA HISTORIC ASSOCIATION TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A GOOD CONCLUSION FOR THIS OUTBUILDING THAT'S BEEN ABANDONED IN THE BACK. UM, I HAVE TO ADMIT, IT DOES NOT LOOK AS BAD AS THE PREVIOUS BUILDING WE WERE, UH, CONTEMPLATING. SO WHAT WE WERE THINKING ABOUT BEFORE WAS KEEPING THIS RESIDENCE AS IS AND ADDING AN ADDITIONAL GARAGE IN THE BACK. WE SHIFTED AWAY FROM THAT. UM, WE DIDN'T WANT TO CHECKERBOARD THE BACKYARD AND THE M V H A CONCURRED WITH THAT TOO. [02:50:01] SO WE, OUR NEXT STEP WAS TO TRY TO, UH, COMBINE INTO A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE, A GARAGE WITH THE RESIDENCE ON TOP. WE WERE MET WITH SOME RESISTANCE ON THAT, SO WE WENT TO THINKING ABOUT A ONE STORY COMBINED. AND THEN FINALLY, AFTER ALL THAT, WE WERE ENDING UP WITH A ONE STORY GARAGE ONLY TO KIND OF TAKE YOU THROUGH THE STEPS WE'VE GONE THROUGH TO TRY TO BE, UM, TO, TO ADOPT, UH, THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM M V H A. UM, SO WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW IS JUST KEEPING THE, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND ELONGATING IT TOWARDS THE FRONT A LITTLE BIT TO ACCOMMODATE TWO CARS. UM, MY FAMILY, MY GRANDFATHER, UH, OWNED A GARAGE. MY FATHER CURRENTLY OWNS A GARAGE. UH, I WAS IN AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING FOR A LONG TIME AND WANT TO HAVE A WORKSHOP HERE WHERE I CAN TAKE OUR THREE YOUNG BOYS, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO WORK ON VEHICLES. SO ONE PART OF THIS WAS BEING ABLE TO HAVE A SINGLE GARAGE DOOR. WE WE CAN, WE COULD TAKE ONE VEHICLE AND PARK RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GARAGE TO BE ABLE TO DO WORK ON IT. UM, IT'S MORE THAN JUST A PARKING AREA FOR US. AND SO WENT AROUND AND LOOKED AT DIFFERENT PROPERTIES IN THE AREA AND, UM, FOUND THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF THEM JUST WITHIN A STONE'S THROW OF US THAT HAD THE SINGLE LARGE GARAGE DOOR. UM, SO THAT WAS ONE ITEM THAT WOULD, WOULD ASK YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER. WHAT MATERIAL DO YOU PROPOSE YOUR GARAGE DOOR TO BE? UM, I THINK IT'S JUST GONNA BE WOOD. THERE'S NOTHING WOOD OR METAL. I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT MATTERS TOO MUCH. UM, BUT WE HAVE SOME PICTURES ON FILE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S OF ANY HELP THAT WE TOOK GOING THROUGH, UM, THE AREA TOWARDS THE BACK, BUT THERE'S HERE WE HAVE ADDRESSES AND, AND SORT OF GARAGE DOOR PICTURES AND THEY'RE ALL WITHIN A COUPLE BLOCKS. I DON'T HAVE ANY, UM, AGAINST THE ONE DOOR. I WAS JUST MORE, I THINK MORE INTERESTED IN SEEING LIKE A CARRIAGE STYLE, LIKE SOMETHING WITH WINDOWS. IF YOU NOTICE THOSE, UH, DOORS THAT ARE THE TWO LENGTH, TWO CAR LENGTHS HAVE WINDOWS OR SOME KIND OF A DESIGN THAT BREAKS UP THAT BIG, THE FACADE FLAT. YEAH. YEAH. SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER. YEAH, WE CAN LOOK AT HOW MUCH EXTRA COST IT WOULD BE. UM, 'CAUSE I FRANKLY DON'T KNOW, BUT, UH, YES, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM. ARE ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS. YEP. THE DRIVEWAY WIDTH ITSELF, I BELIEVE THAT YOUR STAFF IS APPROVING, UM, WIDENING TOWARD THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. IT'S REALLY TIGHT TO GET A MODERN VEHICLE IN AND OUT OF THAT DRIVEWAY. IT'S VERY LONG AND NARROW. AND SO I'VE TAKEN SOME PICTURES SHOWING, UM, WHERE THE PREVIOUS OWNERS HAD A LOT OF PROBLEM WITH GETTING THEIR S U V IN AND OUT. THEY WERE, THE RIMS WERE PRETTY MUCH DESTROYED AND THEY ALSO DESTROYED THE CURB IN THE PROCESS. SO ASKING TO WIDEN, I BELIEVE, FROM JUST UNDER EIGHT FEET TO SOMETHING, UH, AKIN TO 10 FEET. AND YOU'VE ALSO NOTICED IN THE PICTURES THAT THE, THE CURRENT DRIVEWAY IS ACTUALLY NARROWER THAN THE STREET ENTRY. SO WE'RE NOT ASKING TO GO ANYTHING CRAZY, WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE JUST A NORMAL VEHICLE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF WIDENING WITH A BUFFER. WELL, LET ME CLARIFY. WE KIND OF SEPARATED THE DRIVEWAY WIDENING REQUEST INTO TWO SEPARATE ITEMS. SO ONE REQUEST ITEM IS TO WIDEN THE PORTION CLOSEST TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH, YOU KNOW, INTERACTS WITH THIS CURB CUT. SO THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE, WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THAT PORTION. HOWEVER, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE WIDENING THAT'S TAKING PLACE FURTHER BACK ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE STIPULATION THAT A LANDSCAPE BUFFER BE ADDED IN THIS AREA TO MITIGATE THAT VIEW. I UNDERSTAND THE MATERIAL THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, UH, FOR WIDENING IT, UH, TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THAT SITE PLAN. WHAT MATERIAL IS THAT? IT WOULD BE ASPHALT TO MATCH THE EXISTING. AND FOR REFERENCE, HERE'S ONE VIEW OF THE EXISTING CONDITION, UM, WHERE THAT AREA IS INFILLED WITH BRICK PAVERS CURRENTLY. SO JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, THE EXISTING WIDTH OF THE ASPHALT IS EIGHT FEET AND THEY'VE EXTENDED THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY WITH, UH, PAVERS TO 10 FEET. SO THE PAVERS, THERE'S A SLIGHT CURVE THERE. UM, THAT'S THE PART THAT'S INTERFERING WITH THE RIMS AND TIRES. SO THE VEHICLES COMING IN AND OUT. THE IDEA IS TO REMOVE THAT SINGLE STRIP OF BRICK AND EXTEND THE ASPHALT OVER TO THE GRASS AREA AND INSTALL A CURB, UH, BEFORE THE GRASS. I HAVE SOME PICTURES IF IT HELPS. UM, IN THE P D F THAT SHOWS KIND OF WHAT A CHALLENGE IT IS TO BACK THE, THE MINIVAN IN AND OUT OF THAT AREA. UM, IF YOU GO TO LIKE THE, [02:55:01] THE, THE MIRRORS, YOU CAN SEE THAT YOU'RE VERY TIGHT ON EITHER SIDE AND YOU HAVE TO WATCH REALLY CAREFULLY. UM, IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING. GOT IT. THE NEW DRIVEWAY IS IN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY PLUS THE PAVED AREA, OR IS IT WIDER THAN THAT? NO, WOULD NOT GO PAST THE PAVERS. BOOTING THE PAVERS TO THE GRASS. YEAH. SO THE WAY IT'S, I'M SORRY. THE WAY IT'S INSTALLED, UH, RIGHT NOW IS THE WAY WE WOULD RECOMMEND WIDENING A DRIVEWAY. SO THE EXISTING, THE HISTORIC CONDITION OF THE DRIVEWAY IS IN ONE MATERIAL. IN ONE, WE NEED MORE DRIVE SURFACE. WE WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT EX, THAT EXPANSION IN THE WIDTH BE DONE ON ONE SIDE AND A DIFFERENT PAVER. SO WHAT EXISTS THERE IS, OH, SO I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IF YOU LOOK, THERE'S ACTUALLY A CURB THERE. IT'S NOT FLUSH. SO YOU CANNOT ACTUALLY DRIVE ON THOSE PAVERS. I DON'T KNOW IF YES, AN IDEAL SITUATION. THE ASPHALT WOULD BE THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE CURB AND YOU COULD DRIVE ACROSS THE DIFFERENT MATERIALS WITH EASE. RIGHT? SO CAN WE TAKE A LOOK AT THE, THE P D F? IT HAS A, A CLOSEUP HOW WIDE THIS PHOTO FROM GOOGLE MAPS LOOKS LIKE. THE CURB CUT HAS ACTUALLY BEEN WIDENED OVER TIME. I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE, THE HISTORY IT LOOKED, I MEAN THAT WHOLE CONCRETE WORK IS PRETTY OLD, YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING WIDTH OF THE, UH, DRIVE ON THE STREET SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK. UM, SO IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE, THE ASPHALT ITSELF IS SOMETHING AROUND EIGHT FEET. AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE WIDTH OF HOW YOU CAN GET IN AND OUT OF THAT FROM THE STREET SIDE, IT'S SOMETHING CLOSER TO PROBABLY NINE AND A HALF OR 10 FEET. I THINK THAT THE KEY PIECES ON THE RIGHT, THOSE PAVERS ARE NOT FLUSH, IT'S UP. YOU KNOW, UM, ACTUALLY IF YOU GO TO ONE OF THE VERY FIRST SLIDE OF THE P D F ON THE RIGHT SIDE, YOU'LL SEE THAT, UM, WHERE IT'S ALL BEATEN UP WITH, UH, THE TIRE MARKS AND THE, THE CHUNKING FROM THE WHEELS HITTING IT. THAT'S WHAT'S MAKING INGRESS AND EGRESS SO DIFFICULT. ASK A SILLY QUESTION HERE. HMM. POSSIBLE THAT THE NEW ASPHALT BE BROUGHT UP, FLUSH WITH THE CURB. I THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE A SUBSTANTIAL DRAINAGE PROBLEM. THERE'S ALREADY A DRAINAGE ISSUE IN THE BACK THAT WE'RE NEEDING TO ADDRESS. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT OR NOT. HMM. WE'VE THOUGHT ABOUT A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS HERE AND IT, IT SEEMS, THERE'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND ABOUT THE NEED AND I DON'T SEE AN EASIER WAY TO, OR A BETTER WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS. WELL, I THINK ONE OF THE, UH, THINGS THAT WOULD FOLLOW WHAT, WHAT I THINK, 'CAUSE I'VE SEEN IT IN THIS COMMISSION IN THE DECISIONS THEY'VE MADE IN THE PAST, IS THAT YOU'D SHAVE THAT CURVE DOWN THE CURB DOWN TO THE ASPHALT LEVEL AND THEN BRING THE PAVERS DOWN OR PULL IT ALL OUT AND BRING ALL THOSE PAVERS DOWN WITH A CURB LINE. THAT A CURB LINE. BUT WOULD, WOULD, WOULD THERE STILL BE ABLE TO BE A CURB LINE ON THE OUTSIDE WOULD BE THE QUESTION, RIGHT? I MEAN, THIS WOULD, THE, THE, THE CURB LINE WOULD BE SHAVED DOWN LEVEL, SO YOU'D SEE THAT WHITE LINE AND THEN THE PAVERS WOULD BE BROUGHT DOWN AND YOU ESSENTIALLY HAVE THE SAME THING OUTTA TWO MATERIALS BE ASKED. I'M NOT SURE CAN STEP CLARIFY IF WE HAVE, UM, ON THAT CONCRETE CURB? I MEAN, I WAS THINKING IT COULD BE KIND OF A MIDDLE SOLUTION, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'VE DONE THAT ABOUT REMOVING A CONCRETE THAT THAT SINGLE CONCRETE CURB DONE THAT BEFORE. I, I, I JUST WANT TO THINK OUT LOUD ABOUT THIS. SO I OCCASIONALLY JOKE ABOUT SPENDING AN HOUR ON A DRIVEWAY AND A CURB AND SOMETIMES 10 MINUTES ON A FULL EDITION OR NEW PROJECT. BUT THIS, THIS, THIS HAS ME KIND OF CAUGHT IN A SPOT. UH, THE GUIDELINES WOULD SUGGEST THAT THAT ORIGINAL MATERIAL AND THE ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION OF THE DRIVEWAY, OF THE DRIVEWAY BE PRESERVED. UM, I THINK AN ORDINARY RECOMMENDATION, IF THERE WERE NO PAVERS THERE WOULD BE TO ADD, UH, A MAT, UH, SOMETHING LIKE [03:00:01] PAVERS THAT YOU COULD DRIVE OVER SEAMLESSLY TO ESSENTIALLY FUNCTIONALLY EXTEND THE USABLE SURFACE OF THE DRIVEWAY, UH, WITHOUT, UH, RECONFIGURING THE MATERIAL THAT'S THERE. UH, SO WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN IS A RECOMMENDED, A RECOMMENDATION WE WOULD MAKE. THE TROUBLE WITH THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION IS THAT THE PAVERS ARE, THE PAVERS IN THE CURB ARE HIGHER THAN THE EXISTING ASPHALT. AND, UH, THERE'S A SUGGESTION THAT THE EXISTING ASPHALT CAN'T BE RAISED BECAUSE OF DRAINAGE ISSUES. SO IF IT IS GOING TO BE RECONSTRUCTED OR REPAIRED IN KIND, HERE'S WHERE I AM. I THINK THE CURB IN THE ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION COULD EXIST WHERE IT EXISTS. AND, UH, A UM, A TRANSITION MATERIAL BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY AND THE YARD, LIKE IS CURRENTLY SHOWN ALSO EXIST. BUT I'M, I'M GONNA NEED SOME HELP FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO SOME KIND OF A DESIGN THAT HAS THE CURB AND THE PAVERS, BUT AT A LOWER FLUSH WITH THE ASPHALT BA BASICALLY I WOULD SUPPORT A RECONSTRUCTION OF WHAT WE CURRENTLY SEE THERE TO ACCOMMODATE DRAINAGE. YEAH. SO KIND OF LIKE WHAT I THINK WAS, WHAT COMMISSIONER, UM, WAS SAYING IS, YOU KNOW, SHAVING IS PROBABLY NOT THE RIGHT WORD. IT'S RECONSTRUCTING IT DOWN TO, SO HERE BRUSH WITH THE ASPHALT. HERE, HERE, HERE'S MY VIEW OF THIS. I THINK THAT, UH, ITEM THREE IS GOT TO HAVE A LOT MORE THOUGHT, UH, BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN KIND GET BEHIND WHERE, WHERE IT'S GOING. I'M WONDERING IF THE APPLICANT COME, CAN COME BACK WITH, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, FURTHER DEVELOPMENT IF THAT MEANS THE ASPHALT SOLUTION. BUT WITH DRAINAGE APPROACH AND THAT KIND OF THING. I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO NOT GET ANYWHERE FAST WITH ITEM THREE. SO I WOULD MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE WITH STIPULATION ONE THAT, UH, READS THAT THE GARAGE DOOR, IF IT IS A SINGLE GARAGE DOOR, UH, THAT HAVE, UH, WINDOWS AND APPLIED TRIM TO APPEAR MORE LIKE, UH, CARRIAGE DOORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND THAT ITEM, UH, ONE STIPULATION TWO THAT THE APPLICANT SALVAGES THE EXISTING FRONT FACING WINDOWS AND, AND STORES THEM ON THE SITE. UM, AND ITEM TWO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, THAT OF, OF IT BEING APPROVED. ITEM FOUR, UH, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. CAN I ADDRESS THE LANDSCAPING PIECE? I'M NOT SURE WHICH NUMBER THAT WAS PRECISELY. ITEM FOUR IS WHERE YOU CAN MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRIVEWAY, UH, BEYOND THE FRONT PLANE OF THE, OF THE HOUSE TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE HOUSE. RIGHT. SO THERE WAS A, A STIPULATION THAT ASKED FOR, GO AHEAD STEPHANIE. THERE'S A STIPULATION TIED TO THAT ITEM FOR A LANDSCAPE BUFFER. YES. AND THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT, RIGHT? SO IF YOU, I GOT AHEAD OF MYSELF ON THAT. YEAH, SORRY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE DRAWING HERE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS AN EXISTING PECAN TREE, UM, THAT WOULD BE SHIELDING A LOT OF THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. AND IF YOU GO BACK TO THE P D F, THERE'S A PHOTO FROM THE FRONT THAT SHOWS KIND OF THE VIEW FROM THAT, THAT AREA. SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT IT'D BE VERY DIFFICULT TO TRY TO APPLY ANY SORT OF BUFFER ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT WOULDN'T HIDE EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON BEHIND WITHOUT ACTUALLY INTERFERING WITH THE DRIVEWAY ITSELF. OKAY. SO I AM AMEND MY MOTION FOR ITEM FOUR WITH STAFF'S, UH, WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL WITHOUT THE STIPULATION. SECOND, HIS MOTION. IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN, SO I HAVE THE DESIGNER AND UH, THE CONSTRUCTION BULKS HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN AVOID ANOTHER TRIP OUT HERE AND TRY TO GET APPROVAL FOR WHAT'S GOING ON ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY. UM, WELL LET'S SEE IF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THINK THAT THAT IS NEEDING A LITTLE BIT MORE THOUGHT AND DETERMINATION. I, I, I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD, I THINK, I DON'T KNOW. I'M GONNA THROW IT OUT THERE. I WOULD BE OPEN TO APPROVING RECONSTRUCTING AS IS. WE KNOW WE'RE GOING BACK WITH A CONCRETE CURVE AND PAVERS WHERE THEY ARE AT A LOWER SURFACE, LOWER HEIGHT FLUSH WITH THE ASPHALT. AND, AND I, I, I WOULD AS WELL. BUT THE ONE THING THAT WE WANT THEM TO, TO, TO, UH, BE CONFIDENT IN IS THAT WHEN THEY LOWER THAT IT'S GONNA BE LOWER THAN THE GRASS. SO THEY'RE GONNA NEED A CURB. SO, SO LONG AS I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED, THAT, THAT THERE WHERE YOU SEE THE RED BRICK LINE, THAT ESSENTIALLY THE CURB, WELL MAYBE WE COULD SAY SUBMIT REVISED PLANTS. YEAH, THE RED BRICK LINE YOU ARE RIGHT. WOULD HAVE TO STAY. UH, BUT BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING HERE, CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF [03:05:01] STAFF? WOULD A DRIVEWAY, UH, RECONSTRUCTION BE ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE? YES. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO US WITH A DENIAL ON THAT ITEM AS IS. OKAY. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. UH, YOUR SITE PLAN SHOWS THE BRICK BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY AND YOUR ENTRANCE WALK, EXISTING BRICK PAVING AS RECTANGULAR SHOWS IT AS AN ANGLED SHAPE. SO, WHICH IS CORRECT. WILL YOU BE CHANGING ANY OF THAT EXISTING? NO, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD ALL BE AS IS. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY MODIFICATIONS AS TO THAT WALKWAY. OKAY. SO THE SITE PLAN IS INCORRECT. LOOK AT PHOTO 14. IT SHOWS THE ANGLE CLARIFYING THAT WE'RE NOT APPROVING THE SITE PLAN. SO MS, SO I, I'LL GO THROUGH MY MOTION JUST SO IT'S UH, CLEAR. SO ITEM ONE WITH THE STIPULATION ITEM, UH, STIPULATION NUMBER ONE, READING, UH, THE GARAGE DOOR, IF IT IS A SINGLE GARAGE DOOR, UH, HAVE WINDOWS AND APPLIED TRIM TO APPEAR MORE LIKE UH, CARRIAGE DOORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, ITEM ONE, STIPULATION NUMBER TWO THAT THE APPLICANT SALVAGE UH, THE EXISTING FRONT FACING WOOD WINDOWS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. UH, APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO, UH, DENIAL OF ITEM THREE, APPROVAL OF ITEM FOUR, UH, AS SUBMITTED SECOND. MOTION A SECOND. UH, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. [B-15 19-6661 Address/Description: 311 PEREIDA ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-507 Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Amy Perez/KAI HOMES LLC Request: Amendment to previously-approved windows City Council Dist.: 1] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER B 15, CASE NUMBER 20 19 5 0 7 AT THREE 11 PRADA, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO AMEND AND CLARIFY THE WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS IN THE SECOND FLOOR FACADE TO ALLOW VINYL CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED INSTEAD OF EXPOSED WOOD, BOTH OPTIONS WOULD BE TRIMMED AND PAINTED APPROPRIATELY. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AMENDING THE WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS. THE CASE COMMENT IS THAT A NUMBER OF RENOVATION ITEMS WERE APPROVED FOR THE PROPERTY AT THREE 11 PARRETTA, INCLUDING WHOLESALE FENESTRATION RESTORATION TO THE SECOND FLOOR FRONT FACADE ON A SITE VISIT CONDUCTED ON AUGUST 2ND. STAFF FOUND THAT THE WINDOWS WERE INSTALLED WERE VINYL CLAD WOOD WINDOWS INSTEAD OF WOOD WINDOWS AS APPROVED WITH STIPULATIONS AT THE MARCH 20TH H D R C HEARING. AT THIS TIME, ONLY A COMMISSION ACTION LETTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED OR HAS BEEN ISSUED BY STAFF IS AWAITING FOR THE STIPULATED MATERIALS TO BE SUBMITTED. PRIOR TO ISSUING THE ACTUAL C O A WHEN STAFF CONFRONTED THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE DISCREPANCY, THE APPLICANT EXPLAINED THAT THEY INSTALLED VINYL CLAD WOOD WINDOWS IN GOOD FAITH, NOT KNOWING THAT THEY'RE DISTINCT FROM EXPOSED WOOD WINDOWS. AND UPON FURTHER REVIEW, INCLUDING A LETTER FROM THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STAFF FOUND THAT OTHER DISCREPANCIES IN THE DORM ARE RECONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TRIM SIDING, FASCIA AND SOFFIT STAFF ADVISES THE APPLICANT WORK WITH STAFF TO CLARIFY ALL POTENTIAL DISCREPANCIES. WE CAN HAVE APPLICANT HERE, PLEASE YES, WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT UP AT THIS TIME. WE DO HAVE A CITIZEN AS WELL. I'M AMY PEREZ. I AM THE OWNER OF 3 1 1 PEDA. THIS IS WHAT THE HOME LOOKED LIKE WHEN WE PURCHASED IT. UH, IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. OH, CAN I? PERFECT. SO MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE REMODELED SEVERAL HISTORIC HOMES, BUT NONE TO THIS MAGNITUDE. SO WE TOOK ALL OF THE O H P CLASSES, WE MADE EVERY EFFORT TO LEARN AS MUCH AS WE COULD ABOUT THIS PROCESS. 'CAUSE THIS IS A HOME THAT'S COME IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE YEARS. IT'S KIND OF A GIANT MESS AND A BIG UNDERTAKING. SO WE DID EVERYTHING WE COULD TO LEARN THE PROCESS AND FOLLOW THE RULES AND THAT'S WHY WE SUBMITTED OUR PACKAGE. UH, FOR THE MARCH 20TH HEARING, I WAS VERY DETAILED. SO YOU CAN SEE IN THE RED BLOCKS [03:10:01] I HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT I WAS REQUESTING SO THAT THERE WOULD BE REALLY NO GRAY AREA ON WHAT WAS APPROVED AND WHAT WASN'T. THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT I REQUESTED THREE BY FIVE AND THREE BY THREE WINDOWS, THE EXACT BRAND SERIES. EVERY MATERIAL THAT I WAS ACT I WAS ASKING FOR, THEY REITERATED IN THEIR FINDINGS AND THEN IN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS THEY RECOMMENDED. AND YOU ALL APPROVED THESE EXACT WINDOWS. THESE ARE WHAT I INSTALLED. AND IN THE NOTATION, NOTATION IS APPLICANT INSTALL WOOD WINDOWS AND THEN THE MAJORITY OF THE STIPULATIONS ARE AROUND THE RECESSING OF THE WINDOWS IN THE SURROUND. NOWHERE IN ANY OF THE PAPERWORK DOES IT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DRAWINGS. 'CAUSE THE DRAWINGS OF THE SURROUND WERE ALL IN MY ORIGINAL PACKET. NOWHERE DOES IT ASK FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS. IT JUST SAYS TO INSTALL WOOD WINDOWS, WHICH IS WHAT I REQUESTED. THEY WERE VERY AWARE OF EVERY DETAIL AND THEY APPROVED THEM. SO I, YOU KNOW, BEING A NEW PROCESS, I SAT DOWN AT THE DESK, ASKED LOTS OF QUESTIONS AND I WAS TOLD, IF YOU'RE APPROVED, YOU'RE APPROVED. GET YOUR PROPER PERMITS AND YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD. SO THAT'S WHAT WE DID. WELL, LOOKING AT THAT PREVIOUS, UM, F COMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE NEW WINDOWS ON THE FRONT FACADE BASED ON FINDING C WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLS WOOD WINDOWS. DOESN'T SAY VINYL CLAD WOOD WINDOWS, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THEY'RE NOT APPROVING MY SPECIFIC WINDOWS. AND THEY DO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MY WINDOWS ARE WOOD FAF HAS UPDATED OUR SPECIFICATIONS TO EXPLICITLY CLARIFY THAT FOR ALL WINDOW REPLACEMENT CASES. SO THAT IS SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. SO THIS IS THE PLAN THAT WE HAD SUBMITTED JUST OF THE FRONT FACADE AND AS WELL AS THE PICTURE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO FIND ONLINE OF THE HOUSE PRIOR TO THE MOVE. WE'VE MADE EVERY EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE THIS HOME LOOK AS ORIGINAL AS POSSIBLE AND REALLY PUTTING THE EFFORT INTO THE DETAILS. AND PREVIOUSLY WE HAD ACTUALLY WANTED TO DO A FOUR FOOT WINDOW IN THE FRONT INSTEAD OF A FIVE FOOT. AND I DISCUSSED IT WITH O H P AND 'CAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO MAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE ROOM FOR THE FRONT PORCH EDITION THAT WE WERE ADDING. AND THEY HAD TOLD ME NO. SO IF THEY TELL ME NO, I HAVE NO PROBLEM MAKING CHANGES, BUT THEY DIDN'T TELL ME NO ABOUT THOSE WINDOWS. SO WHEN THEY TOLD ME NO ON FOUR FOOT, I CHANGED THE OPENING TO FIVE FOOT. I ASKED FOR SPECIFIC WINDOWS, WAS NOT TOLD NO. SO I INSTALLED THOSE SPECIFIC WINDOWS, YOU KNOW, NOT THINKING THERE WAS ANY GRAY AREA. I WAS PRETTY CLEAR ON WHAT I ASKED FOR. THEY APPROVED AND WE MOVED FORWARD. I I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION TO STAFF. IF ME, I, IS IT THE FACT THAT IT'S WOOD OR IS THE PROFILE WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO YOU? OR, OR, YOU KNOW, IN, IN TERMS, IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT THE EFFORTS THAT ANDERSON HAS DONE TO CREATE A WINDOW THAT MIMICS A WOOD WINDOW, RIGHT? THAT, WHAT'S THE PURPOSE? UH, DOES THAT MEET THE OBJECTIVE OR IS IT MATERIALITY AS A WHOLE? THAT, SO FOR, UH, RESTORATION ON HISTORIC FACADES, WE LOOK AT MATERIALITY AS A WHOLE, AS PART OF THE RESTORATION EFFORT. UH, LOOKING FURTHER INTO ANDERSON SPECIFICATIONS, THEY ACTUALLY VOID THEIR WARRANTY IF THE VI THE VINYL IS PAINTED OVER, WHICH WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENT PROFILE FROM A HISTORIC PROFILE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BASING OFF OF IN REGARDS TO APPROVING, UH, VINYL CLAD OR ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS FOR OTHER, UH, RESTORATION PROJECTS. WE RESERVE THOSE OFTEN FOR NON HISTORIC ADDITIONS OR NON HISTORIC INFILL OR NON HISTORIC REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, WHICH IS A KEY POINT THAT I MAKE IN A COUPLE OF SLIDES. WELL, WELL THEN, THEN, THEN, IS IT THAT YOUR, YOUR KEY CONCERN OR CONSIDERATION IS THE VOIDING OF THE WARRANTY? NO. SO WE HAVE WINDOWS SPECIFICATIONS AND WE'RE VERY, VERY, LIKE, I GUESS MAYBE YOU CAN PASS THAT ON TO OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS. UM, PROBABLY NOT FAMILIAR A HUNDRED PERCENT WE HAVE WINDOWS SPECIFICATIONS. WELL, NO, I I WOULD ONLY, I'VE ONLY, I ONLY MADE THE COMMENT, BUT I SPENT 20 YEARS IN PRESERVATION ARCHITECTURE AND I KNOW THAT TO A LARGE EXTENT IT DEPENDS ON THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN FRONT. 'CAUSE HUMAN BEINGS MAKE DECISIONS, RIGHT? SO, WELL WE, WE HAVE GUIDELINES ON THAT SPECIFIC, ON THE MATERIALS, ON THE WOOD MATERIAL. I THINK THE CASE THAT WE HAVE HERE THAT MAY HAVE BEEN KIND OF A MISUNDERSTANDING AND WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY ALSO BEEN CONSIDERING HUMAN ERRORS AND YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IN SOME WAYS OR NOT, I, UM, I THINK, AND I I I DO FEEL FOR THE APPLICANT BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT IS CONFUSING WHEN WE APPROVE SOMETHING WITH STIPULATIONS AND IT'S ACTUALLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT'S APPLIED, UM, APPLIED FOR. AND IT CAN BE CONFUSING. IT REALLY CAN, I WOULD RATHER SAY DENIAL OF THOSE WINDOWS, BUT APPROVE THAT TYPE OF WINDOW. [03:15:01] NOW, UM, I IT MIMICS EVERYTHING ELSE, RIGHT? THE MEETING RAILS AND THOSE SPECIFICATIONS. WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT MATERIALS, GENERALLY SPEAKING, SPEAKING THAT THE, UM, THE PROFILE MATCHES THE SPECIFICATIONS. UH, TO ANSWER, UH, COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ'S QUESTION, YES, WE'RE LOOKING AT, WE'RE TRYING TO RESTORE IT BACK TO A PAINTED WOOD WINDOW PROFILE. IF THAT CAN BE ACHIEVED, THEN UH, THE COMMISSION HAS THE DISCRETION TO, UH, TO PROTEST AGAINST STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. LET'S LET THE FINISH HER PRESENTATION, I THINK. AND THEN IS YOU'RE HALFWAY THROUGH YOUR SIGNS. YES. SO WHEN I RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM STAFF TELLING ME THAT I NEEDED TO ADDRESS AN ISSUE BECAUSE, UH, I GUESS, UH, SOMEONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD COMPLAINED. 'CAUSE INITIALLY WHEN WE FIRST INSTALLED THE WINDOWS, 'CAUSE THE COMPLAINT DID COME VERY QUICKLY AFTER THE INSTALL, UM, NONE OF THE RECESSING, NONE OF THE ADDITIONAL WORK HAD BEEN DONE. SO THE INITIAL EMAIL THAT THEY SENT ME WAS THAT THEY RECEIVED A COMPLAINT THAT WE INSTALLED VINYL WINDOWS. SO OF COURSE MY INITIAL REACTION IS, NO, I DIDN'T INSTALL VINYL WINDOWS. I INSTALLED THE EXACT WINDOWS. I ASKED YOU IF I COULD INSTALL THEY'RE WOOD WINDOWS THAT YOU OBVIOUSLY YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T SEE WHEN YOU'RE WALKING BY ON THE OUTSIDE. SO I SUBMITTED THESE PICTURES OF THE INSIDE WHERE YOU CAN SEE PRETTY CLEARLY THAT THEY ARE WOOD WINDOWS WHERE ON THE OUTSIDE IT JUST LOOKS FINAL. AND THEN WHEN I ASKED, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? THEY SAID THAT THEY WOULD GET BACK TO ME. AND TWO MONTHS WENT BY AND I DIDN'T HEAR FROM ANYONE. I CALLED, I EMAILED, I SHOWED UP HERE ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS AND MY ASSIGNED PERSON WAS HERE BUT WOULDN'T COME AND SPEAK TO ME AND SAID THAT SHE WOULD CALL ME BACK THE NEXT DAY. AND I STILL NEVER RECEIVED A PHONE CALL. BUT TWO MONTHS LATER I GOT AN EMAIL. IN TWO MONTHS, I MEAN, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THE CARRYING OUT DIDN'T STOP WORKING FOR TWO MONTHS. WE CONTINUED FORWARD 'CAUSE I ASSUMED WE INSTALLED THE RIGHT WINDOWS. I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THEM. CLEARLY THEY'VE REALIZED THERE WAS AN ERROR HERE AND THEY'VE MOVED ON. SO, SO DID WE. THIS IS WHAT THE HOUSE LOOKED LIKE WHEN THE COMPLAINT WAS RECEIVED. CLEARLY AS YOU'RE WALKING BY, IT LOOKS LIKE JUST PLAIN VINYL WINDOWS AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. AND ALSO THE NEIGHBORS WERE PROBABLY NOT THE MOST HAPPY WITH US. WE HAD A 10 FOOT HOLE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. THEY HAD, THAT WAS THE ONLY WAY THAT WE COULD GET WATER AND SEWER TO THE HOUSE. THE ROAD WAS SHUT DOWN AND OUR FRONT YARD WAS A MUD MOUNTAIN. I GET WHY THE NEIGHBORS WEREN'T HAPPY. I GET WHY IT LOOKS JUST LIKE VINYL WINDOWS. BUT THAT WAS A TEMPORARY STATE. THIS IS WHAT THE EXTERIOR LOOKS LIKE NOW. AND WE DID PAINT THAT BOTTOM RIGHT WINDOW TO KIND OF GIVE YOU GUYS AN IDEA OF WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE WHEN THE HOUSE IS COMPLETELY PAINTED. SO THE WINDOWS THEMSELVES WILL BE PAINTED BLACK DOWNSTAIRS. THE HOUSE, UM, WAS WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT OVER, ONLY THE DOWNSTAIRS WAS BROUGHT, NOT THE SECOND STORY. SO WHEN, WHEN WE RESTORED ALL OF THOSE WINDOWS, WE DID IT WITH THE PLAN TO PAINT THOSE WINDOWS BLACK. AND I FEEL LIKE ONCE IT'S ALL PAINTED, YOU WON'T REALLY BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE. AND I THINK A COUPLE OF KEY FACTORS TO CONSIDER IS THAT THE WINDOWS ARE IN KIND WITH OUR NEIGHBORS. DIRECTLY BEHIND US IS THE CEDAR STREET TOWN HOMES, WHICH IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, NOT WOOD WINDOWS AND ALSO A DIFFERENT KIND OF PROJECT. AND THEN RIGHT NEXT TO US IS A HOME THAT STARTED WORKING ABOUT THE SAME TIME WE DID. THEY ARE AN ORIGINAL HOME WITH ORIGINAL WINDOWS THAT THEY WERE STORED JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL PORTION OF OUR HOME. AND THIS IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDITION THAT ALSO DOES NOT HAVE WOOD WINDOWS, BUT VINYL. AND ANOTHER, I THINK IMPORTANT THING TO CONSIDER IS THAT THE SECOND STORY OF OUR HOUSE IS NEW CONSTRUCTION. AND THE RULES AND THE RULES ON NEW CONSTRUCTION WINDOWS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. HERE'S A, IT'S, IT'S A PICTURE OF THE HOUSE WHEN IT WAS BROUGHT OVER, SHOWING YOU THAT THAT SECOND STORY WAS NOT BROUGHT WITH IT. WE DIDN'T BUILD THIS SECOND STORY. THE HOUSE PASSED THROUGH SEVERAL HANDS BEFORE WE GOT IT. AND ONE OF THE PREVIOUS OWNERS BUILT THAT SECOND STORY NOT TO SCALE WHATSOEVER . SO THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH. UM, THE ORIGINAL HOUSE HAD SOME BUMP OUTS ON EACH SIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT ALSO HAD WINDOWS, BUT WHEN THE PREVIOUS OWNERS BUILT THAT SECOND STORY, THEY DIDN'T BUILD THAT IN. SO WE'VE MADE EVERY ATTEMPT TO REPLICATE THAT SECOND STORY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE BECAUSE O H P HAS CHANGED THEIR WORDING ON THESE WINDOWS THAT IT SHOULD AFFECT THINGS THAT WERE APPROVED PRIOR TO THAT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'VE REALIZED THAT THINGS WOULD BE A LITTLE CLEARER IF WRITTEN DIFFERENTLY, AND I UNDERSTAND WHY FROM THEIR FORWARD THINGS WOULD CHANGE, BUT I DON'T THINK PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ITEMS SHOULD HAVE TO BE REAPPROVED. WELL, I THINK TO BE CLEAR, IT WAS APPROVED, BUT THERE WAS A STIPULATION. YOU MISINTERPRETED THE STIPULATION OR YOU OUGHT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE, THE STIPULATION. I DON'T THINK THE HEIRS WITH STAFF ON THIS. [03:20:02] UM, BUT I THINK YOU, YOU RAISED SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT THE, THAT THIS THING IS A NEW ADDITION BECAUSE IT'S THIS RECONSTRUCTIVE, PERHAPS IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO DISTINGUISH THE WINDOWS WITHIN THE RECONSTRUCTIVE PORTION SEPARATELY FROM THE AUTHENTIC HISTORIC WINDOWS THAT WERE, UH, . YES. I THINK THAT'S YOUR STRONGEST ARGUMENT, I DON'T THINK, GOING AROUND LOOKING AT A BUNCH OF ADDITIONS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DEVIATE FROM THE, FROM THE, THAT SHOW THE PICTURES OF WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE. AND MAYBE APPLICANT CAN, I DON'T SEE THIS BEING A A BEFORE WE GET IT TOO DEEP INTO THE WEEDS, WE HAVE CITIZENS WHO BE HEARD. DO JUST ONE, UH, VIRGINIA VAN LEAVE. I SIT DOWN. YES, PLEASE. THEN WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP. THANK YOU. EVENING. UH, MY NAME IS VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, 91 18 FAIRLAND SAN ANTONIO. I'M SPEAKING FOR THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THE SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY SUPPORTS THE FINDINGS OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE RESTORATION AND REHABILITATION UNDERWAY AT THREE 11 PURITA IN THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE PLAN APPROVED BY O O H P CALLED FOR WOOD WINDOWS, NOT VINYL CLAD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR PRESERVATION. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY'S BUILDING GRANT, WHICH THIS APPLICANT HAS RECEIVED FOR RESTORATION OF THE ORIGINAL FRONT PORCH, REQUIRES THAT ALL ASPECTS OF THE BUILDING'S RENOVATION CONFORM TO THESE STANDARDS. WE TRUST THE OWNERS WILL ENSURE THAT THE BUILDING IS IN COMPLIANCE PRIOR TO COMPLETING THE PORCH WORK AND SUBMITTING A REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF THE GRANT FUNDS. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THE SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY, PATTY ZZ PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. CAN THE APPLICANT RETURN THE PODIUM? I ALSO THINK I SAW A LETTER FROM THE KING WILLIAM. THEY WERE ASKING ABOUT THE TRIM WORK. COMMENTING ON THAT. YEAH. UM, SO WHAT IS APPROVED IS THE DRAWING ON THE SCREEN. UM, WITH RECENT PHOTOS, WE DO THINK THAT THERE'S SOME MINOR TWEAKS TO DETAILING AND AS THE APPLICANT SAID, UM, THE DORMER WASN'T BUILT NECESSARILY EXACTLY HOW IT WAS. AND SO A LOT OF IT IS JUST KIND OF LEARNING IN THE FIELD. AND SO WE'RE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THOSE WITH THE APPLICANT. UM, ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL, HOPEFULLY THEY CAN BE SMALL TWEAKS TO BE, BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE DRAWING, YOU SEE. UM, SO WE WILL HAVE THAT DISCUSSION SEPARATELY AND IF SOMETHING REQUIRES FURTHER APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION, WE'LL ADDRESS IT LATER. SO BASED ON THE PHOTOS THAT WERE ON THE SCREEN EARLIER, I THINK IT'S MORE LIKE A REBUILT THAN A, A NEW ADDITION. CORRECT. RECONSTRUCTION. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF THE WAS KEPT, BUT NONE OF THE SECOND STORY WAS BROUGHT OVER. SO, UM, AND, AND I THINK, AND I DON'T KNOW. I'VE NEVER HAD AN EXPERIENCE WITH SOMEBODY IN RECEIVING GRANT AND NOT BEING COMPLIANCE. AND I THINK THAT'S AN INFORMATION AND PROBABLY AN IMPORTANT POINT THAT, UM, BECAUSE THESE PROPERTIES BECOME MAYBE LIKE THERE'S A LIST OF THOSE AND THEY BECOME LIKE SAMPLES. THE GRANT IS FOR THE FRONT PORCH, ONLY THE ADDITION OF THE FRONT PORCH, BUT IT HAS TO DO WITH MY WINDOWS. I ACTUALLY SAT DOWN WITH RON ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS ABOUT THIS PRIOR TO ME SUBMITTING MY APPLICATION. 'CAUSE I REALLY DID WANT THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY'S FEEDBACK. AND I SAT DOWN WITH HIM. I ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE PACKET AND A LOT OF THE PICTURES I SUBMITTED, I RECEIVED FROM RON AT THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, I THINK. AND ANOTHER POINT IS THAT WE HAVE THESE WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS AND, AND THERE MAY HAVE BEEN CHANGES, BUT THEY'VE ALWAYS BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT WOOD IS THE ONLY MATERIAL THAT WE ACCEPT. UM, SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN BLAME THIS ON STAFF. UM, I THINK THIS IS JUST ABOUT US COMING DOWN TO A COMMON GROUND AND, AND SEE WHAT, WHAT'S THE BEST SOLUTION FOR THIS, UM, FOR THIS CASE? WELL, MY, MY FEELING IS THAT THE, THE WINDOWS ACHIEVED THE OBJECTIVE. NOW, IT'S REALLY FUNNY ON MY END BECAUSE I WAS THINKING ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT STAFF SAID IN TERMS OF PAINTING, I WAS THINKING, WELL, WILL WHITE PAINT STICK TO THAT? AND WHEN IT SCRATCHES, THE BLACK'S GONNA SEE. RIGHT? BUT THEN YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE PAINTING THE WINDOWS BLACK. SEE, SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A WILD CARD THERE. THE WINDOWS, THEY ACHIEVE THE, THE OBJECTIVE. IT IS A RECONSTRUCTION. UM, AND THERE'S ELEMENTS IN THAT RECONSTRUCTION [03:25:01] OR ELEMENTS IN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE, OR, OR THE PICTURES OF THE BLUE AND WHITE THAT, THAT DON'T QUITE SEEM HISTORIC EITHER. IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S GONE THROUGH SOME, SOME, UM, UH, DEVELOPMENT OVER THE DECADES. AND THAT WHAT YOU'RE RESTORING IS PROBABLY, UH, OR WHAT YOU'RE RECONSTRUCTING IS PROBABLY NOT EVEN THE RECONSTRUCTION OF SOMETHING THAT'S ACCURATE TO BEGIN WITH. SO IN ITS HYBRIDNESS, RIGHT, THE, THE WINDOW PROFILES ARE REALLY WELL, WELL DONE BY ANDERSON FROM THE STREET. THEY'RE GONNA LOOK IDENTICAL. THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THAT SECOND FLOOR MAINTENANCE OPPORTUNITY THAT THAT WILL ENSURE THAT THEY'RE LOOKING SOUND FOR, FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. UM, AND THEY'RE, AND THEY'RE MAKING AN EFFORT TO MATCH THE LOWER, UH, AREA OR THAT, THAT THEY'RE GONNA MATCH THE LOWER AREA. SO IN THE, IN THE INTEREST OF, OF, UH, OF IT MEETING THE SPIRIT OF, OF ITS INTEGRITY, I, I THINK IT WARRANTS, UM, UH, APPROVAL PLANNING ON PUTTING BACK THE, UM, WINDOW COVERS THE SCREENS. YEAH. WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA MAKE NEW ONES. 'CAUSE THE MAJORITY OF THEM WERE EITHER BENT OR MISSING COMPLETELY. SO WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD SCREEN GUIDE THAT WE'VE USED IN THE PAST THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE MADE IT GUESS BRAND NEW ONES. THAT COULD PROBABLY BE OUR SOLUTION. THIS IS A VERY HARD CASE AND LONG AND SHORT OF IT, BUT THESE, THESE SHOULD BE WOOD WINDOWS. THE MATERIALITY OF THESE THINGS IS VERY IMPORTANT. THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT YOU DESCRIBED, I THINK ARE COMPELLING. AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S DONE ANYTHING IN BAD FAITH HERE. UM, BUT WHAT'S COMPLICATING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER FOR ME? WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION. ARE YOU, DO YOU PLAN ON, UH, PURSUING TAX CREDITS FOR THE RESTORATION AS WELL? YES. THAT WAS PART OF MY ORIGINAL SUBMISSION WITH THE PACKET AND, UH, AND ADDITIONAL GRANTS FOR RESTORING THIS. THE GRANT THEY DID GIVE ME WAS FOR THE FRONT PORCH EDITION. THE SANDBORN MAP SHOW THAT THE HOUSE ORIGINALLY HAD A FULL LENGTH FRONT PORCH. AND THAT IS WHAT THE GRANT IS FOR, IS PUTTING BACK THE FULL LENGTH FRONT PORCH ON THIS HOUSE. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS GRANT, ACCORDING TO THE LETTER FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, HAS SOME ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS THAT CONCERN, UH, MORE THAN JUST THE FRONT PORCH RE RECONSTRUCTION. CORRECT? OUR GRANT IS ONLY FOR THE FRONT PORCH. SHE MAY, SHE DID BRING SOME OF THAT UP, BUT THAT'S THE FIRST I'VE HEARD OF THAT. 'CAUSE UH, IN THE LETTER LETTER THEY SAYS THAT IT REQUIRES THAT ALL ASPECTS OF BUILDINGS RENOVATION CONFORM TO THESE STANDARDS. SO IN ADDITION TO, IT'S NOT JUST THE THINGS THAT THE FUNDS ARE GOING TO SPECIFICALLY THE GRANT FUNDS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE INTENT OF THEIR GRANT WAS GO TOWARDS A PROJECT THAT WAS FOLLOWING THE STANDARDS PRETTY CAREFULLY. PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE WHENEVER COME TO PURSUE THE TAX CREDITS WHERE, WHICH ARE, ARE IN ADDITION TO THIS OTHER THING, A SEPARATE THING ENTIRELY, UM, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET APPROVAL OF THOSE TAX CREDITS WHEN, UH, REDESIGNED ELEMENTS DON'T COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES. 'CAUSE WHAT WE'RE PUT IN A POSITION, UH, TO CONSIDER IS TO APPROVE, UH, TAX CREDITS ON SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES. SO, UH, MATERIALITY IS VERY IMPORTANT, UM, ON NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS. WE, OUR, OUR STIPULATION RECOMMENDS WOOD WINDOWS, WHICH ARE ALL WOOD WINDOWS OR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS IN NEW CONSTRUCTION AND IN RECONSTRUCTIONS AND, AND REHABILITATIONS, IT'S, UH, WOOD WINDOWS, ALL WOOD WINDOWS. PERHAPS IF THERE'S A NEW ADDITION, WE CONSIDER AN ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW. SO THE REAL RUB I HAVE IS THIS MATERIAL IS JUST NOT APPROPRIATE IN THAT HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. EVEN THOUGH THAT 90% OF THIS WINDOW IS WOOD, THE FACE IS, UH, A VINYL OR A COMPOSITE, IT'S NOT PAINTABLE. IT, IT CHANGES OVER TIME. THEY CHALK, THERE'S A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THAT MATERIAL IN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, I'M NOT DENYING THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME VINYL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT'S UNLIKELY THAT WE'VE APPROVED THEM IN ANY RECENT YEARS. AND A LOT OF WHAT YOU'LL SEE ARE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS. UH, WHICH WE, WE DO REGULARLY CONSIDER. RIGHT? SO, I MEAN, THIS IS REALLY TOUGH FOR ME. UH, MY INCLINATION IS TO DENY THE REQUEST. FORTUNATELY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOUR WINDOWS, CORRECT? FOUR IN THE FRONT AND FOUR IN THE BACK, THREE WITH COMMISSIONER FISH. I MEAN, THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE VINYL WOOD CLAD WINDOWS. AND THEN WE, I DON'T, [03:30:01] I DON'T REMEMBER US EVEN CONSIDERING THAT. I MEAN, IN LUMEN PLA WE'VE CONSIDERED THAT. UM, AND THE WINDOWS ARE, IT'S A NEW THING FOR US. WE'VE NEVER DONE HOUSE WHERE WE'VE HAD TO DO NEW WINDOWS. WE'VE ALWAYS RESTORED WHAT WAS THERE. BUT THIS ONE IT WASN'T. BUT THERE IS A REASON FOR THE GUIDELINES AND THERE'S A REASON FOR THE MATERIALITY. I DON'T WANT GET INTO DETAILS 'CAUSE I'M NOT THE EXPERT IN THE FIELD, BUT I'VE READ UP ON IT AND IT'S IN OUR GUIDELINES. AND WE'VE READ, WE'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, SHOOTING A LOT OF ARTICLES AND I KNOW THAT VINYL EXPANDS AND THERE'S LIKE HUGE PROBLEMS WITH, WITH, WITH IT WHEN YOU HAVE A WOODHOUSE. SO PROBABLY THOSE WINDOWS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO OPEN IN A YEAR. THEY'RE HORRIBLE. THE MATERIAL IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH, YOU KNOW, OLD HOMES. THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE MADE FOR CHEAP, CHEAP BUILD HOMES. SO THERE'S A LOT OF TECHNICAL THINGS THAT, WELL, I I DON'T THINK THE WINDOWS THAT ARE INSTALLED HERE ARE CHEAP. THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOOD WINDOWS. THAT'S NOT MY, HADN'T BEEN TOLD. NO. I I I REALLY LIKE, THESE ARE VERY EXPENSIVE. I WOULD'VE BEEN HAPPY TO INSTALL SOMETHING ELSE IF I HAD UNDERSTOOD THAT THESE WEREN'T GONNA WORK. I UNDERSTAND THE COMMISSION, THE, I MEAN, WE HAVE A COMMISSION TO DEAL WITH THINGS LIKE THIS THAT WHERE THINGS SOMETIMES GET GRAY. THERE'S SITUATIONS THAT ARE COMPLICATED. IN MY MIND, WHAT PUTS THIS OVER THE TOP TOWARD A DENIAL IS, UH, THE TAX CREDITS THAT ARE PROBABLY GONNA BE IMPORTANT FOR THIS PROBLEM. THIS, THIS PROJECT AS A WHOLE. THAT'S A PARTICULARLY PROBLEMATIC PIECE OF THIS FOR ME. AND, UH, I, I DON'T THINK YOU WANNA PUT THE COMBINATION OF TAX CREDITS AND GRANT GRANTS IN, INTO, INTO QUESTION OVER THE EIGHT WINDOWS TO UNINSTALL AND THROW AWAY EIGHT WINDOWS AND THEN BUY NEW EXPENSIVE ONES. WHEN IF I HAD JUST BEEN TOLD NO IN THE FIRST PLACE, I WOULD NEVER HAVE ORDERED IT. IT'S, IT'S A FRUSTRATING POINT. AND I DID NOT GET COMMUNICATION WHEN I ASKED ABOUT IT AND WANTED MORE CLARIFICATION. I MEAN, I'M HAPPY AND I HAVE MADE, I FEEL LIKE EVERY EFFORT TO COMPLY AND TO LEARN. AND I FEEL LIKE I HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN WHAT I NEEDED TO. I I, I TOTALLY FEEL FOR YOU, AND I'M SORRY YOU'RE GOING THROUGH THIS. IT IS A HIGH PROFILE HOME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I DRIVE BY IT SIX TIMES A DAY 'CAUSE I'M, I'M IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. MY GIRLS GO TO SCHOOL AROUND THE CORNER. IT WAS A HIGH PROFILE CASE WHEN THEY WERE, THE BOND WAS GOING ON FOR OUR SCHOOL. AND I THINK A HOUSE LIKE THIS DESERVES WITH WINDOWS. AND IN THE END, I THINK YOU'RE GONNA BENEFIT WITH THE TAX CREDITS AND THE GRANTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S REALLY GONNA BE CHALLENGING FOR YOU TO GET THOSE. SO I HAVE TO CONCUR WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TOO. SAME HERE. AND JUST TO ENCOURAGE YOU THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THROWING THEM AWAY. THERE'S LOTS OF PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT WOULD BUY THESE. THEY'RE STANDARD SIZES, AREN'T THEY? UH, I MEAN THEY'RE, THEY'RE A SPECIAL ORDER. NO, NO ONE WANTS WOOD WINDOWS WITH THE, THESE DAYS, YOU KNOW, NOW THAT IT'S GOT THE CLAD ON IT, I MEAN HONESTLY THE CLAD I ONLY DID TO PROTECT THE WINDOW AND TO SAVE US SOME PAINTING, I WOULD HAPPILY HAVE INSTALLED SOMETHING ELSE HAD I BEEN TOLD THAT THESE WINDOWS WERE A PROBLEM. AND THAT'S WHY I AM VERY FRUSTRATED. MY POINT IS, IT'S PROBABLY NOT A TOTAL LOSS. YOU CAN RECOUP SOME MONEY FROM THOSE, OR AT THE VERY LEAST DONATE THEM TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY IF ACTS RIGHT OFF OF THAT. BUT I'D ALSO HAVE TO RIP OUT ALL OF THE SURROUND THAT WE'VE BUILT. WOULD THE, THESE WINDOWS AREN'T FLANGE, ARE THEY? I'M NOT. WOULD THE COMMISSION CONSIDER A COMPROMISE OF REQUIRING WOOD WINDOWS ON THE FRONT AND ALLOWING THE VINYL CLAD WINDOWS IN THE BACK TO REMAIN? I THOUGHT OF IT, BUT BECAUSE, SORRY, I, I WOULD CONSIDER IT, BUT MY FEAR IS THAT THAT DOESN'T SOLVE HALF OF THE APPLICANT'S PROBLEMS DOWN ROAD. I MEAN IF THIS HISTORIC SOCIETY, CONSERVATION SOCIETY TAX CREDITS IN THE GRANT. YEAH, THE GRANT OF THE NEXT EXACTLY. AND THE HIGH PROFILE QUESTION BECAUSE THE HOUSE, I MEAN WE CONTINUED, SO WE'VE GOT SHEET ROCK, WE'VE GOT SPRAY FOAM INSULATION. LIKE THIS IS GONNA COST ME MORE THAN THE GRANT. I'D RATHER TOSS THE GRANT THAN UNINSTALL THESE WINDOWS IF I WAS GIVEN THE OPTION. 'CAUSE THIS IS GONNA BE MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE ERS I FEEL LIKE I JUST NEED TO SAY ON THE RECORD THAT ANY DECISION TODAY NEEDS TO BE BASED ON THE GUIDELINES AND NOT A THIRD PARTY GRANT PROCESS. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY, THAT SHE HASN'T, I MEAN, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT DECISIONS THE GRANT PROCESS IS GONNA MAKE BASED ON ANYTHING REALLY. I, I, I HAVE, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF THE HOUSE. I REALLY DON'T FEEL LIKE, LIKE THOSE ADDITIONS, THEY DON'T SEEM TO ME THAT THEY WERE, THE HOUSE WAS BUILT WITH THOSE ADDITIONS AND ORIGINALLY, UM, THEIR PROPORTIONS [03:35:01] ARE, ARE JUST, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM NATURAL TO A HOUSE OF THAT, OF THAT ERA THAT THOSE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT EVEN PORCHES. UM, SO TO, TO ME JUST, I I'M NOT CERTAIN WHY THAT'S SUCH A, SUCH A, SUCH AN IMPORTANT POINT. YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT, UH, THE WINDOWS ARE THERE, THERE IT IS A WOOD WINDOW. IT'S JUST THEY CLA THE OUTSIDES TO PROTECT THEM WITH ALUMINUM OR WITH STEEL OR WITH VINYL. AND IN THIS CASE, THERE, I THINK, I THINK THERE'S A KIND OF A REASONABLE ASSUMPTION ON THE PART OF THE, OF THE APPLICANT THAT THERE WAS A WOOD WINDOW AND MAYBE MADE AN EXTRA DECISION TO CLA 'EM ON THE OUTSIDE SO THAT THEY WOULD, OR, OR TO SELECT ONE THAT WAS CLADDED ON THE OUTSIDE SO THAT THEY WOULD LAST LONGER. I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN UNREASONABLE MISTAKE TO MAKE. UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN AN AREA WHERE THEY'RE BEING, WHERE THERE'S A RECONSTRUCTION. BUT, BUT, AND, AND I DON'T WANNA OPEN A CAN OF WORMS, BUT THERE'S OTHER THINGS THERE THAT, THAT DON'T MEET ANYBODY'S EYE THAT ARE EVEN MORE DIFFERENT. SO WITHOUT GOING DOWN THAT ROAD, I, I, I THINK IT'S A REASONABLE, YOU KNOW, SECOND LEVEL NOT IN THE, IN THE, IN THE, IN THE, UH, UH, HEIGHT WHERE SOMEONE CAN TOUCH IT. SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA FEEL THAT WOOD ON THE INSIDE. IT'S WOOD. UM, THE PROFILE IS IT'S A MATCH. AND THE ANDERSON WINDOW'S A GOOD WINDOW. I MEAN, I THINK IF YOU WERE GONNA ASK ABOUT QUALITY, YOU'D WANT TO ASK AN ANDERSON PERSON AND ANDERSON SWEARS BY THOSE HISTORIC REPLACEMENT WINDOWS. YEAH, P DOESN'T MIND VERIFICATION. AND THE GRANT, I WOULDN'T MIND, UM, ENTERTAINING A MOTION TO REPLACE THE FRONT FLOOR AND NOT THE FAR BACK. AND I AM HAPPY TO DO WOOD SCREENS SO THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, NO ONE CAN SEE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE WINDOW TO THE NEXT WOOD SCREENS ON THE FRONT ON THE, WELL, I MEAN IF YOU'RE REPLACING THE FRONT TO WOOD, UH, AND I DIDN'T SEE ANY WOOD SCREENS ON THE PICTURE OF THE HOUSE WHERE YOU LOOKED. IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL ONES, YOU CAN SEE THEM BENT. YOU CAN SEE ONE EVEN BEFORE IT WAS MOVED. THAT'S LIKE ON THE GROUND BENT. SEE THE SCREENS? YEAH, BUT THOSE ARE THE BOTTOM ONES, RIGHT? YOU'RE GONNA DO THE BOTTOM SCREENS? YES. I'M GONNA DO, I THE PLAN WAS TO DO, IT'S NOT BOTTOM THE WHOLE HOUSE. ALL YOU'RE GONNA DO THE, YOU COULD REALLY CAN'T TELL A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANY OF THE WINDOWS. I'M GONNA DO THE MOTION. I'M GONNA DO MOTION. OH, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK I CAN APPROVE A SUBSTITUTE. IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S, UH, SOME, SOME COMMISSIONERS UP HERE THAT WILL CONSIDER IT. SO I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO DENY. IF THAT MOTION SHOULD FAIL, I'LL SUPPORT A COMPROMISE POSITION. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND FOR DENIAL. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY A. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED SAY NAY NAYYY. MOTION PASSES. NOW YOU CAN YES. TAKE THIS TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. GO THROUGH THAT, UH, PROCEDURE WHICH STAFF CAN HELP YOU WITH IF YOU FEEL YOU'D LIKE TO, UH, APPEAL THIS DECISION. [B-16 19-6653 Address/Description: 619 BARBE ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-493 Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Henry Rodriguez/Queta Construction Group, LLC Request: Amendment to previously-approved roofing City Council Dist.: 1] MOVING ON ITEM B 16 HT R C CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 4 93 ADDRESS, SIX 19 BARBIE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO INSTALL A RIDGE CAP ON THE NEWLY INSTALLED STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. THE CRIMPED RIDGE SEAM WAS INSTALLED INCORRECTLY IN THE REQUESTED RIDGE. CAP IS PROPOSED IN AN EFFORT TO AESTHETICALLY MITIGATE THE SEAM. STAFF. DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. GOOD EVENING. UM, HENRY RODRIGUEZ OUT OF, UH, GETTA CONSTRUCTION, THE PRESIDENT OF THE COMPANY. UM, I'VE BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS NOW. UH, WE'RE A FIVE STAR COMPANY. YOU CAN LOOK OUR UP. UH, LOOK US UP. WE ARE ONE OF THE BEST, UH, RESIDENTIAL CONTRACTORS IN SAN ANTONIO. I'M A CONTRACTOR PLUS HERE WITH THE CITY. UNFORTUNATELY, I TOOK MY EYE OFF THE BALL ON THIS ONE AND DROPPED THE BALL. UH, I HAD MY ROOFERS WHO I'VE HAD FOR OVER TWO AND A HALF YEARS, UH, INSTALLED THIS ROOF WITH THE, UH, CRIMP AND IT DIDN'T GO AS PLANNED. UM, IT'S WAVY, IT'S OFF. CLIENT IS DISAPPOINTED. I'M DISAPPOINTED. AND, UM, REALLY CONSIDERING, UH, TO SEE IF, UH, WE CAN ADJUST IT BY INSTALLING A RICH CA RICH CAP. I UNDERSTAND WE DON'T WANT TO NOBODY ELSE TO FOLLOW UP. IF YOU WERE TO APPROVE IT, IT'S THAT, UM, THE TWO HOUSES, THE THREE HOUSES IN THAT, ON THAT BLOCK ALL HAVE RICH CAPS. AND THAT DOESN'T SAY THAT ACTUALLY GET RICH CAP [03:40:01] AS WELL. BUT YOU KNOW, I CONSIDER IT JUST 'CAUSE THIS, IT'S AN EYESORE NOW AND THE ONLY WAY TO MITIGATE THIS WOULD BE TO TAKE IT ALL OFF BECAUSE METAL DOES NOT BEND VERY WELL. BEND. IT'S ONLY MEANT TO BEND ONCE AND, UH, TO TRY AND OPEN IT UP AND TRY AND FIX THAT, IT'S GONNA BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOT ONLY IT'S IRREGULAR IN THE LINE, BUT WHY ARE WE SEEING A BUMP IN THAT, IN THAT RIDGE AS WELL? 'CAUSE I'M NOT SURE A RIDGE CAP IS GONNA SOLVE YOUR PROBLEMS. WELL, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT DOWN A LITTLE BIT TOO BECAUSE, UH, THE ORIGINALLY WAS A, WAS A WOOD SHINGLE ROOF AND IT HAD A METAL ROOF ON TOP. SO WE REMOVED THE METAL ROOF. WE, WE REMOVED THE, UM, WE REMOVED THE, THE METAL ROOF A AFTER THE, AFTER THE WOOD SHINGLES, WE REMOVED THE METAL ROOF AND WE DIDN'T REALLY SEE THAT HIP WHERE THAT HUMP WAS. BUT WE, WE KNOW HOW TO MITIGATE THAT AND BRING IT DOWN. WHAT IS MAKING IT, WHAT'S CAUSING THE HUMP THE CAUSING WAS THE, THAT HUMP? ACTUALLY, I DON'T AT THIS POINT BECAUSE UNTIL I OPEN IT BACK UP AND, AND FIGURE IT OUT BECAUSE, UH, I'D HAVE TO OPEN UP THAT PART RIGHT THERE FIRST AND MAKE SURE I BRING IT DOWN. IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN, WE'RE GONNA GO INSIDE THE ATTIC AND, AND ADJUST TO WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED AND GET THAT TO SETTLE DOWN. GO TO PHOTO NINE PHASE. OH, IS THE OWNER REQUESTING THIS OR YOU ARE REQUESTING THAT BECAUSE THE OWNER, I MEAN IT GOT THE TAX VERIFICATION, RIGHT? NO, NO, JUST THE CLIENT IS STILL WORKING ON THE PROJECT. IT'S STILL, IT'S STILL A SKELETON INSIDE. UH, BUT HE WANTED TO GET IT DONE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, UH, THE INVESTORS, UM, AND TO KEEP THE, YOU KNOW, INTEGRITY OF THE HOUSE AND KEEPING IT WATERPROOF AND SO FORTH, 'CAUSE THE OLD ROOF AND WAS ALREADY DETERIORATING. SO WE WENT THROUGH IT THAT CLARIFY ON THE TAX VERIFICATION. UM, SO WHEN THE, I BELIEVE IN JUNE OR THE PREVIOUS HEARING FOR THIS CASE, TAX CERTIFICATION WAS APPROVED, AN APPLICATION FOR TAX VERIFICATION HAS NOT YET BEEN SUBMITTED. IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE APPROVED NOW BECAUSE OF THIS, WE DON'T CONSIDER THIS A VIOLATION. I MEAN THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT THE QUALITY OF WORK MOSTLY FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT THIS IS A CRIMPED RIDGE AND SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING WE WOULD BRING FORWARD AS A VIOLATION. UM, IT'S HERE AS A PRIVATE REQUEST TO INSTALL THE ALTERNATIVE RIDGE CABINET INSTEAD OF THE CRIMPED RIDGE AND IT'S RIGHT IN THE FRONT. LOOKING AT THIS PHOTO HERE, THERE'S QUITE A CURVE IN HERE. SO HOW WOULD THAT BE PROPOSED TO BE FIXED? SO THAT THE, OR HOW WIDE A RIDGE CAP ARE YOU PROPOSING? UH, THE STANDARD IS, UH, NINE NINE INCHES RIGHT FROM SIDE TO SIDE. OR NOT NINE, NINE INCHES. IT'S MORE LIKE, UH, I THINK LIKE 12 INCHES. IT'S GONNA, IT'S GONNA COVER IT. WE'RE GONNA ADJUST THAT. WE'RE GONNA ADJUST THE, THAT WHOLE, THAT WHOLE HIP JUST A LITTLE BIT, JUST ENOUGH SO THAT IT'S COME COVERED COMPLETELY. BUT IT NEEDS TO BE COVERED FROM THE TOP ON DOWN. UH, THE, THE CRIMPING WAS, UH, A SLOPPY WORK AND YOU KNOW, I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT. I UNDERSTAND. YES. THIS, THIS WAS A REPLACEMENT OF A METAL ROOF. IT WAS ORIGINALLY A WOOD ROOF AND THEN THEY PUT A METAL ROOF ON TOP OF IT. AND SO I DEMOED BOTH OF THEM. YES, BUT NO, IT WAS AN ORIGINAL, UH, WOOD SHINGLE ROOF. WELL, THE, THE, THE OUTER ROOF THAT HAD BEEN THERE THAT WE CONSIDERED, UH, YES SIR. AS ESSENTIALLY THE REFERENCE THAT HAD A CRAMPED RIDGE SEAM. YES SIR. THIS IS IN KING WILLIAM AND WE OFTEN GET REQUESTS FOR, UH, RIDGE VENTS BECAUSE IT'S A MUCH LESS, UH, EXPENSIVE WAY TO DEAL WITH REROOFING. YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THAT LABOR. AND UH, I WOULD SAY THE COMMISSION RARELY CONSIDERS IT A A, AN OPTION THERE. THERE MIGHT BE SOME CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE, WHERE WE HAVE, AND IN THE EVENT THAT WE HAVE, UH, WE STIPULATE THE LOWEST POSSIBLE, UH, HEIGHT AND A MINIMAL WIDTH. AND, UH, SO I DON'T THINK, UH, UH, A RIDGE CAP IS APPROPRIATE HERE, NUMBER ONE. BUT NUMBER TWO, I THINK THE KIND OF RIDGE CAP THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO FIX THIS ISSUE WOULD, WOULD GO FARTHER THAN EVEN. WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT AS A POTENTIAL SOLUTION. I, I CONCUR WITH THAT AND I, UM, MAKE A, A MOTION, UH, TO DENY BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS. DO I HAVE A SECOND? WHAT WAS THE MOTION AGAIN? MOTION WAS FOR DENIAL. AND THERE WAS A SECOND OR NO SECOND. I'LL DO SECOND. THE MOTION IS SECOND FOR DENIAL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. [03:45:01] WE CAN APPEAL IT NOW. EXCUSE ME. WE CAN APPEAL. THAT'S ONE TIME THIS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK [B-18 19-6617 Address/Description: 123 CROFTON HDRC Case No.: 2019-483 Historic District Name: King William RIO District: RIO-4 Applicant: John Chester Request: Front walkway and driveway replacement with brick City Council Dist.: 1] YOU. AGENDA ITEM B 18 H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 18 4 83 1 23 CROFTON. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE EXISTING FRONT YARD WALKWAY WITH THE BRICK WALKWAY AND INSTALL ADDITIONAL SIDEWALK PAVING. TWO TO INSTALL A BRICK DRIVEWAY IN THE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVEWAY. AND THREE, TO PERFORM FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING MODIFICATIONS INCLUDING THE INSTALLATION OF VARIOUS PAVING MATERIALS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE OF THE FRONT YARD WALKWAY BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED IN KIND WITH MATCHING MATERIALS AND A MATCHING PROFILE. TWO, THAT THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY NOT EXCEED 10 FEET IN WIDTH. THREE THAT NO GRAVEL OR SIMILAR MATERIALS BE INSTALLED IN THE FRONT YARD AS A WHOLESALE GROUND COVER. AND FOUR, THAT AN ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING PLAN BE SUBMITTED TO O H B STAFF FOR REVIEW OF THE FINAL GROUND COVER AT THE END OF CONSTRUCTION ON SITE. JOHN CHESTER, 6 28 EAST GUNTHER. WE AGREE EVERYTHING THAT HE SAID WE AGREE WITH AND SOUNDS GOOD AND WE'RE ALL IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT. BUT WHAT WE WAS WONDERING IS COULD WE HAVE OUR CHOICE OF COLORS ON THE WALKWAY GOING FROM THE STREET TO THE FRONT STEPS? I'LL GIVE A BIT OF A BACKGROUND. UM, SO THERE'S AN EXISTING CON, EXCUSE ME, THERE'S AN EXISTING CONCRETE WALKWAY THAT LEADS FROM THE FRONT PORCH TO THE SIDEWALK OR TO THE RIGHT OF WAY. UM, UPON FURTHER INVESTIGATION, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS DISCOVERED BRICK LOCATED UP UNDER THE SIDEWALK. UM, THE APPLICANT'S MAKING A CASE TO MAKING A CASE FOR THAT AS THE BRICK RATHER. WELL, LET ME REPHRASE THAT. THE APPLICANT'S MAKING A CASE TO NOT REPLACE THE CONCRETE WALKWAY AS WHAT'S EVIDENT AS BEING ORIGINAL, BUT RATHER NOTING THAT DUE TO THE DISCOVERY OF BRICK HERE, THAT'S THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL AND TO MATCH THAT. UM, AND THEN FOR ADDITIONAL REFERENCE, UM, THERE'S A LETTER FROM THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION IN YOUR PACKETS, UM, WHERE THEY COMMENT ON, UM, THE REPLACEMENT OF THIS SIDEWALK IS KING WILLIAM, UH, SUPPORT TO USE A BRICK FOR THE SIDEWALK? YES, THEY HAVE NOTED IN THEIR LETTER THEY DO SUPPORT THE USE OF BRICK AND THEY'RE SHOWING THE SUPPORT BASED ON THE, UH, SO THE KING WILLIAM NUMBER OF FRONT WALKS, THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION, THEIR, THEIR FINDINGS OR THEIR RECOMMENDATION ON THIS TO THE COMMISSION ISN'T BASED ON THE, THE DISCOVERY OF THE EXISTING BRICK. THEY'RE BASING IT ON, I'LL GO BACK UP TO THE SITE PLAN. UH, STAFF ESSENTIALLY NOTED THAT WE FOUND THE REPLACEMENT OF, OR EXCUSE ME, THE INSTALLATION OF THIS PART OF THE WALK, WHICH WOULD BE NEW ON SITE TO BE APPROPRIATE. WE ALSO FOUND THE INSTALLATION OF BRICK IN THE DRIVEWAY TO BE APPROPRIATE. UM, THERE ARE MULTIPLE, UH, DRIVEWAY PROFILES FOUND ON CROFTON AS THERE ARE FRONT WALKWAYS. HOWEVER, THE EXISTING CONCRETE IS WHAT STAFF FOUND TO BE APPROPRIATE, OR EXCUSE ME, ORIGINAL AT THE TIME THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION SAID THAT THEY FOUND IT WOULD BE MORE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING IF THERE WAS ONE CEMENTITIOUS MATERIAL ON SITE RATHER THAN THE CONCRETE FROM THE FRONT PORCH TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND BRICK ON EACH SIDE OF IT. THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR THEIR DECISION ON THAT. UM, IT STAFF WOULD JUST LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE GUIDELINES SAY THAT THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL SHOULD BE REPAIRED IN PLACE AND IF THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL CAN'T BE REPAIRED IN PLACE, UM, THEN AN IN KIND REPLACEMENT SHOULD TAKE PLACE. SO I, I, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE WITH STIPULATIONS TWO, THREE, AND FOUR. UH, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FURTHER COMMENT ON, ESPECIALLY ON THE, THE LANDSCAPE, UH, PROPOSAL YOU'RE SHOWING JUST A FEW PLANTS SORT OF DOTTED THROUGH THE FRONT YARD. I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. I THINK YOU NEED TO RETHINK THAT AND THINK ABOUT, UM, CONSOLIDATING THOSE IN A, IN A PLANT BED SOMEWHERE NEAR YOUR WALKWAY. I THINK THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE. YEAH. YEAH. AND ESPECIALLY FOR RIGHT NOW, WHAT WE WANTED TO DO WAS GET THESE PLANTS IN THE TREES AND STUFF, UM, IN THE FALL SO THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND TAKE ROOT AND BE, BE READY TO GO. THEN AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS FINISHED IN THE JOB SITE, ANOTHER YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF, THEN WE'RE GONNA GO BACK INTO REISSUE ANOTHER, [03:50:01] UH, PROPOSAL TO FINISH THE FRONT YARD. STIPULATION FOUR TALKS ABOUT THEM, HIM RESUBMITTING A LANDSCAPE PLAN, I THINK TO FLESH OUT WHAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN HERE TODAY. UH, APPLICANTS, IT'S ON THE SCREEN. I THINK THAT WHAT COMMISSIONER IS SAYING IS IT'S TOO SPREAD OUT OF PLANTS ALL OVER THE PLACE, BUT THAT IS THE UPDATED LANDSCAPING PLAN FROM THE APPLICANT. THIS IS THE ORIGINAL LANDSCAPING PLAN. ESSENTIALLY STAFF IS TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S NOT DECOMPOSED GRANITE THAT COVERS 90% OF THE YARD. SO, UH, WE'RE GONNA ENSURE THAT AN ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING PLAN IS SUBMITTED WITH EITHER LAWN OR GROUND COVER OR SOME LOW GROWTH PLANTS, UM, THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE DISTRICT. DECOMPOSED GRANITE PROPOSED FOR THIS FRONT WALK. NO SIR. STAFF IS JUST PUTTING THAT SAFETY NET IN THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T COME UP IN THE FUTURE. JUST ONE LAST COMMENT. THE, THE DRAWINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SHAPE OF THE FRONT WALK DOESN'T REALLY MIMIC THE EXISTING SHAPE OF THE CONCRETE WALK. SO I THINK THE WALK, EVEN IF IT'S BRICK, SHOULD BE, SHOULD CONFORM TO THE EXISTING SHAPE OF THE CONCRETE WALK. THE, THE STRAIGHT THE WALK AS A STIPULATION. YEAH, THE STRAIGHT WALK WHILE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FROM THE GATE TO THE PORCH. RIGHT. AND THEN THE FLARE UP BY THE FRONT PORCH. OH, SHOULD MATCH WHAT'S, UH, YEAH, YEAH. SHOULD MATCH WHAT'S THEIR EXISTING MATCH. WHAT'S THERE? YES. CORRECT. YES, WE WILL, I I WILL ADD THAT I, I DON'T BELIEVE THE MOTION HAS BEEN SECONDED YET. I'LL, I'LL ADD A, A FIFTH STIPULATION THAT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE SIDEWALK BE MAINTAINED. SECOND. A MOTION A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. SAME SIGN PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE. OH, NO PROBLEM. THE LAST ONES, OH, ONE MORE. I'M SORRY. . [Approval of August 21, 2019, HDRC Meeting Minutes.] NO, THAT WAS IT. SO WE JUST HAVE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM AUGUST 21ST. I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. SECOND. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. SAME SIGN. MOTION PASSES. WE ARE ADJOURNED. * 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.