* 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. [00:00:05] AFTERNOON, [3:00 PM – Call to Order] I'D LIKE TO CALL THE ORDER THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19TH, 2025. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? CASTILLO? YES. SAVINO. HERE. VELASQUEZ? HERE. GALLOWAY. HERE. MAZUA. GDA RA GROUP. HERE. CERVANTES. HERE. HOLLAND. HERE. FETZER AND GIBBS. HERE WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. MAY I HAVE TRANSLATION SERVICES PLEASE? HELLO? GOOD AFTERNOON, BU THANK YOU. THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD OF PORTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I AM JAY MAURICE GIBBS CHAIRMAN AND THE VICE CHAIR IS JEFFREY FETZER. IT IS A FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER IN ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS, FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY AND A RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY. AND FOR DEMOLITIONS AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIRE GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL. AN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE SIGN UP ON A PUBLIC COMMENT SHEET. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SIGN UP. IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF OR REPRESENTATIVE FOR A PROJECT ON THE AGENDA, YOU WILL BE CALLED ON AS THE CASE IS CALLED. CASE REPRESENTATIVES WILL BE GIVEN NO MORE THAN 15 MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR CASE WITH AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. SPEAKERS FOUR OR OPPOSED TO A CASE WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. EACH SPEAKERS MAY ALSO SIGN 'EM TO YIELD THEIR TWO MINUTES TO ANOTHER SPEAKER WHO HAS SIGNED UP. ANYONE WHO IS YIELDING THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AT THE TIME THE SPEAKER IS CALLED ON. CALLED UPON SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE SIGNED UP FOLLOWING PUBLIC TESTIMONY. ANY COMMISSION MAY CALLED UPON ANY SPEAKER TO RESPOND TO FURTHER QUESTIONS. APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF ANY TYPE OF PERMIT. PERMITS MUST BE ATTAINED FOR ALL WORK. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR YOUR FOR WORK APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONS WILL BE EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. NO WORK OF ANY TYPE IS TO BE STARTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS. AFTER A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AT THIS TIME, PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES. THANK YOU AND GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS. UM, SO AT THIS TIME WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON MEETING MINUTES FROM MARCH 5TH. THANK YOU. MINUTES ARE AVAILABLE. UM, HAVE, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MINUTES? ANY CORRECTIONS? I MOTION THAT WE HAVE ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING. SECOND. THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? CASTILLO? AYE. SAV AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE. GROUP. AYE. ANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND GIBBS AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. OKAY. AT THIS TIME WE CAN [CONSENT AGENDA Items are placed on the consent agenda when staff recommends approval or recommends approval with stipulations that the applicant agrees to. Any member of the public desiring to speak on a consent agenda item may sign up and be heard prior to voting on the consent agenda. Commissioners may request to remove any item from the consent agenda and have it placed on the individual consideration agenda. All items on the consent agenda will be considered for approval by one motion adopting the items with staff findings and recommendations.] DRAW OUR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN. UM, I'LL MAKE A NOTE THAT ITEM TWO WILL BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY AND HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM CONSENT. UM, SO THAT LEAVES US WITH ITEMS 1, 3, 4, AND FIVE ON CONSENT. UM, WE HAVE A VOICEMAIL FOR ITEM THREE AND THEN I'LL CHECK IN A SECOND TO SEE IF WE HAVE ANY IN-PERSON SPEAKERS, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE WE DO. SO LET'S HEAR VOICEMAILS. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE, CASE 2025 DASH OH 50 1002 CANMAN BOULEVARD. MY NAME IS ROBIN FOSTER MONTICELLO PARK ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OFFERING COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF BIANCA MALDONADO, PRESIDENT OF MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE MPNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS PO BOX 1 0 0 3 1 5 7 8 2 0 1. WE SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONERS, THAT CONCLUDES VOICEMAILS FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. UH, THERE ARE, UH, A COUPLE OF LETTERS IN YOUR PACKETS FOR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. UM, AND TO ECHO WHAT COREY SAID EARLIER, ITEM NUMBER 2 33 14 NORTH ST. MARY'S WILL BE HEARD UNDER INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. DO ANY COMMISSIONS WISH TO PULL ANY ITEMS? HEARING NONE, MAY I HAVE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT [00:05:01] AGENDA PLEASE? MR. CHAIR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY. SECOND, UM, MAY I HAVE A ROLL? I'M SORRY. MONICA, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? YES. THAT'S 1, 3, 4 AND 5 1 3 4, CORRECT? CORRECT. THANK YOU. ITEMS 1, 3, 4, AND FIVE. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? CASTILLO? AYE. SAV AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE. GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND GIBBS AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. IF YOU'RE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS 2 0 5 EAST HOUSTON, 33 14 NORTH ST. MARY'S, EXCUSE ME, 2 0 5 EAST HOUSTON, 10,002 CANMAN ONE 16 CALLAHAN AND ONE 10 EL WEST ELSMERE. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED. YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER OR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAIL TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. [INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO, HDRC, CASE NUMBER 20 25 0 6 2 33 14. NORTH ST. MARY'S, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL A SURFACE PARKING LOT AT 33 14 NORTH ST. MARY'S LOCATED WITHIN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT ONE. THE LOT IS CURRENTLY VOID OF EXISTING STRUCTURES. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH F WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE PROPOSED CURB CUT BE REDUCED TO NO MORE THAN 25 FEET IN WIDTH. IT'S NOTED IN FINDING B TWO THAT THE APPLICANT INTRODUCE A BUFFER YARD IS REQUIRED BY THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 35 6 72 B THREE AND THE UDC SE IN THE UDC TABLE FIVE 10 DASH TWO TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING, A MINIMUM WIDTH OF 15 FEET, TWO CANOPY TREES, TWO UNDERSTORY TREES, EIGHT LARGE SHRUBS, AND EIGHT MEDIUM SHRUBS THAT ANY FUTURE LIGHTING ELEMENTS BE SUBMITTED TO THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. UM, AND THAT THE PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL LOCAL LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING ARCHEOLOGY. UM, IF APPLICABLE, UM, THE APPLICANT, MR. COLLIN BASS IS HERE IN PERSON, UH, AND COMMISSIONERS. I CAN GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF, UH, WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS FOR THE UDC BUFFER YARD, UH, AND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING. HELLO? HELLO. HI. SO MR. THANK YOU FOR YOUR MEETING COMMISSION, BEAR WITH ME ONE SECOND. UM, HERE IS AN UPDATED SITE PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THE CURB CUT WIDTH. SPECIFICALLY THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE REQUIREMENT FOR 15 FOOT BUFFER YARD, UH, WHICH ESSENTIALLY WOULD REQUIRE 15 FEET OF A BUFFER YARD FOR LANDSCAPING TO RUN PARALLEL WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG NORTH ST. MARY'S. UH, SO ESSENTIALLY, UM, CUTTING INTO THIS ONE PARKING SPOT HERE. UH, BUT MR. BASS, I WILL, UH, START THE TIMER NOW AND YOU CAN TAKE IT OVER. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. HELLO. UM, SO MR. BASS, BEFORE YOU GET STARTED, CAN YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF PLEASE? OH, YES. I'M COLIN BASS, UH, OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU, SIR. PLEASE PROCEED. YES, THANK YOU. UM, SO IT'S KIND OF A, A STRANGE SHAPED PIECE OF PROPERTY. THE, THE SATCH SIDE IS, IS MUCH SHORTER THAN THE OTHER SIDE. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FOR TWO YEARS AND WE HAD SOME PRELIMINARY MEETINGS WITH THE RIVER ROAD, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SOME OF THEIR MEMBERS AND SOME, UM, SUBSEQUENT, UM, MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. SOME OF THEIR REQUESTS WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROJECT WERE, UM, ELIMINATING, UH, EXCESS STREET PARKING. REALLY THE ONLY STREET PARKING WE CAN HAVE IN THAT AREA WOULD BE ON SATCH. OBVIOUSLY ST. MARY'S IS NO GOOD. UM, SO WE WERE TRYING TO BUILD A PARKING LOT THAT CAN CATER TO, UM, BEING RIO ONE, THE BEAUTY OF THE LOT, BUT ALSO MAKING SURE WE HAD ENOUGH SPACES TO KIND OF MEET THOSE STANDARDS. UM, THESE SPACES ARE FOR OUR SMALL BUSINESS, WHICH IS ACROSS THE STREET. ALSO A STRANGE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S KIND OF SANDWICHED BETWEEN THE ACCESS ROAD OF TWO 80 RUN AND ST. MARY'S. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE NO PARKING FOR IT. EXCUSE ME. SO THE 15 FOOT BUFFER, UM, IS, UM, AS FAR AS I I CAN UNDERSTAND IT FROM MR. HALL HERE IS, UM, ADEQUATE ON THE BOTTOM SIDE OF THE MAP, BUT THE TOP SIDE, UH, WHILE 15 FEET AT ITS LARGEST SCOPE BECAUSE OF THE ANGLE OF THE PROPERTY, IT CUTS IT DOWN TO 7.5 AT THE SMALLEST. UM, WE DO MEET THE BUFFER STANDARD ON THE PROPERTY AS FAR AS PERCENTAGE GOES. IT'S JUST KIND OF THAT ONE PARKING SPOT. UM, SO I WOULD, I'M MAINLY JUST ASKING THAT WE CAN KEEP THAT ONE [00:10:01] SPOT DUE TO MY INITIAL MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IT'S KIND OF A ATTACHED WITH. I GUESS THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THESE APPLICANTS? MR. CHAIR? I HAVE A QUESTION. SURE. JUST TO CONFIRM, YOU HAVE REDUCED THE PARKING AREA BY ONE SPACE IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE NARROW DRIVEWAY? CORRECT. OKAY, THANK YOU. MAY I LOST ONE? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OH, OH, SORRY. OKAY, OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? I HAVE ONE. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD? DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS, SIR? LETTERS? NO STAFF HASN'T RECEIVED COMMENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ONE, JUST, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, SIR? THE, THE, THE PARKING SPACE THAT'S IN QUESTION IS PARKING SPACE NUMBER ONE? THAT IS CORRECT. THE PARKING SPACE, NUMBER ONE WOULD BE THE, THE SPOT THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATED. UM, FOR REFERENCE, UM, THIS WAS THE, UM, THE, UH, SORRY. THE SITE PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED, UM, WHERE THE CURB CUT IN THE THROAT OF THE ENTRANCE WAS APPROXIMATELY 35 FEET. UH, AND SO, UM, THIS IS THE REDUCTION THAT COMMISSIONER SAVINO JUST MENTIONED. UM, PARKING SPOT NUMBER ONE HERE WOULD ALSO NEED TO BE ELIMINATED FOR THE APPLICANT TO ACHIEVE, UH, A 15 FOOT DEPTH AT THE BUFFER YARD ACROSS THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU CHAIR. IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS, I'LL DO A MOTION PLEASE. I MOVE TO APPROVE, UM, AS PRESENTED TODAY. SECOND SMITH MOVED AND PROPERTY SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THE APPLICANT DID, UM, STATE THIS CASE ABOUT THE ODD SIZE OF THE, I THINK THE LOCATION OF THE LOT AND THE SIZE OF THE LOT. AND THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN COMPLYING WITH THE STIPULATION OF THE, OF THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY, UM, AND ALREADY HAS, YOU KNOW, DONE THE EFFORT OF ELIMINATING ONE SPACE. I, I WOULD SAY THIS IS, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT I WOULD AGREE WITH. THANK YOU FOR THE FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT. STAND NINE. CAN I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? CASTILLO? AYE. SINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE. GROUP. AYE. ANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND GIBBS. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER SIX, PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX HDRC CASE NUMBER 20 25 0 3 9 1 20. CALLAHAN, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCTED TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY HISTORIC STRUCTURE ON THE VACANT LOT AT ONE 20 CALLAHAN THIS LOT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE LAVACCA HISTORIC DISTRICT. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL AT THIS TIME BASED ON FINDINGS. A THROUGH V STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS PRIOR TO RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. UH, COMMISSIONERS, THERE'S A NUMBER OF ITEMS IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE ME TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE INDIVIDUALLY, I CAN. UM, OTHERWISE WE CAN REQUEST THE APPLICANT PRESENT. NOW LET'S HAVE THE APPLICANT COMMENT PLEASE. UM, COMMISSIONERS. I'LL ALSO NOTE, UM, THE APPLICANT, DANIEL CRUZ IS HERE. UM, HE HAS SUBMITTED, UM, AN UPDATED PRESENTATION. PART OF THIS UPDATED PRESENTATION INCLUDES, UM, A DOCUMENT THAT HAS EACH OF STAFF'S, UH, STIPULATIONS. UH, AND THEN HE HAS A RESPONSE TO IT. SO I'LL ASK HIM TO GO THROUGH THAT. THERE ARE ALSO SLIGHTLY UPDATED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS THAT ARE IN RESPONSE TO A PREVIOUS DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING, UH, AS WELL AS STAFF'S COMMENTS. UH, SO, UM, YOU WANNA START OFF WITH THIS? HOW YOU GUYS DOING? MY NAME'S, UH, DANIEL CRUZ. UH, I'M WITH DESIGN COOP AND I'M REPRESENTING, UH, MY CLIENT FOR ONE 20 CALLAHAN. UM, I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH EACH LINE ITEM HERE TO REALLY TALK ABOUT THE PROJECT IN WHOLE. 'CAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE, UH, ABIDED BY MOST OF THE, WELL, ACTUALLY MOST OF THE GUIDELINES AND HAVE ADHERED TO 'EM. AND WE DID HAVE A DRC AND I DID PRESENT MY CASE THERE, AND I FELT LIKE WE DID MAKE SOME GOOD, UH, DESIGN CHANGES TO ACCOMMODATE AND, AND MEET THE, THE OVERALL REQUIREMENTS FOR A NEW CONSTRUCTION WITHIN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, SO I'LL PROCEED. UM, THE FIRST LINE ITEM, WHICH WAS A SETBACK. UM, THEY WERE ASKING US TO DOCUMENT OUR SETBACK ON OUR SITE PLANS. UM, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DID. UM, LEMME SEE IF WE CAN REFERENCE OUR PLAN HERE SHORTLY. I, I DO WANNA STATE THAT WE ARE, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SITE PLAN, THE TWO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. 1 1 34 CALLAHAN AND ONE 18 CALLAHAN. WE ARE ABIDING BY THE 25 FOOT SETBACK THAT IS REQUIRED BY OUR, UH, PROPERTY. AS WELL AS WE DID KICK OUR SANE MAIN, MAIN [00:15:01] ENTRY FACADE BACK TO KIND OF ALIGN WITH, UH, 1 34 CALLAHAN TO KIND OF GIVE A, A FRONT PORCH APPROACH. SO WE FELT LIKE WE DID, UH, MEET, UH, THAT REQUIREMENT AND PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU GUYS. UH, THE SECOND LINE ITEM WAS A STREET ELEVATION, UH, PROPOSED A MASSING HEIGHT AND AND HEIGHT, UH, IN REFERENCE TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IF YOU SCROLL UP HERE, UH, WE DO SHOW THE ELEVATIONS OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT THE PROPERTIES BEYOND ARE ALSO TWO STORY STRUCTURES. AND THE TWO BOOKENDS ON THE END OF THE BLOCK ARE ALSO TWO, TWO STORIES, UH, STRUCTURES. AND THERE ARE SOME TWO STORY STRUCTURES ACROSS THE, UH, CURRENT PROPERTY. THE THIRD LINE ITEM WAS FOUNDATION HEIGHT, WHICH WAS TO BE RAISED TO ONE FOOT. WE DID A, A, A MEET THAT REQUIREMENT AND RAISE OUR OVERALL, UH, ELEVATION BY A FOOT AND, AND DO HAVE SOME ENTRY, UH, STEPS UP TO THE PROPERTY. LINE ITEM FOUR IS IN REGARDS TO THE PORCH ROOF PORCH MASSING. UM, ON THE SECOND LEVEL, OUR INITIAL DESIGN DID NOT HAVE ANY KIND OF ROOF AT OVER THE, THE, THE, THE SECOND LEVEL PORCH. WE DECIDED TO INCORPORATE ONE KIND OF, UH, HAVE SOME SORT OF ROOF COVERING THAT KIND OF MIMICS SOME OF THE, UH, ROOFS OVER SECOND LEVEL PORCHES, UH, WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, LINE ITEM FIVE, UH, HAS TO DO WITH WOOD SIDING. WE ARE PROPOSING A VERTICAL, LEMME GO DOWN ONE MORE. WE'RE PROPOSING A, UH, A VERTICAL, UH, WOOD SIDING. WE DID PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON THIS. UH, WE ARE PROPOSING A V GROOVE, A WOOD V GROOVE, VERTICAL SITE, UH, SIGHTING. UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE GUIDELINES SAYS IS TO TAKE EXISTING MATERIALS THAT ARE FOUND WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEMPORARY, KIND OF DISTINCT FROM HISTORICAL ELEMENTS. UM, THIS PROFILE IS NOT UNCOMMON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S ACTUALLY THE BACKING OF A, OF, OF A B BOARD. UM, BUT WE ARE STICKING WITH A A FOUR INCH PROFILE AND GIVING A LITTLE BIT MORE DEPTH TO THAT SECOND LEVEL FACADE OF OURS. UM, THE OTHER, A LINE ITEM WITHIN, OR THE OTHER COMMENT WITHIN THAT LINE ITEM, UH, THAT, UH, COMMENT WAS OUR ROOF, UM, TO ABIDE BY THE 18 OR 21 INCH, UH, SPACING ON A GLOOM ROOF. WE ARE, UH, ABIDING BY THAT AND WE WILL PROVIDE, UH, DETAILS ON THAT IF NEEDED. UM, LINE ITEM SIX IS ACTUALLY JUST A REPEAT OF THE COMMENT, SO WE CAN DISREGARD THAT ONE. AND NUMBER SEVEN IS A GROUPING OF WINDOWS SEPARATED BY MULIAN. UH, WE, UH, DID MAKE SOME CHANGES FROM OUR DRC AND OUR DRC. THEY DID MENTION THAT SOME OF OUR, OF OUR WINDOW PROPORTIONS WERE A LITTLE SMALL, WEREN'T REALLY ABIDING BY SOME OF THE OTHER HISTORIC SIZES, UH, UH, PROPORTION AND SCALE. SO WE DID INCREASE ALL OUR WINDOWS TO A STANDARD SIZE, A LITTLE BIT MORE REPRESENTED REPRESENTATIVE OF WHAT YOU FIND LOCALLY WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, WE DID NOT PROPOSE A MULIAN IN BETWEEN THE WINDOWS, KIND OF SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WOULD SEE WHEN YOU HAVE TWO DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS, ONE ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHER. UH, WE FELT LIKE WE COULD TAKE A CONTEMPORARY APPROACH TOWARDS THIS AS THIS IS A NEW BUILD AND NOT AN OLD BUILD. UM, THE OLD, A LOT OF TIMES THOSE, OUR, OUR CLIENT WOULD LIKE TO MAXIMIZE THEIR VIEWS IN AND OUT. UM, SO WE FELT LIKE IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO STICK WITH A CONTEMPORARY APPROACH THERE, UM, AND REDUCE THE MILLIONS, UH, BETWEEN THERE ARE MANY PRECEDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, ON MY OTHER DOCUMENT, I HAVE SOME IMAGES IF YOU SCROLL DOWN. UM, I JUST, SOME OTHER, OTHER STRUCTURES THAT KIND OF SHOWCASE THAT SAME, UH, APPROACH WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE, UH, THE DIVISION SIMILAR TO, TO WHAT WAS BEING ASKED OF US. UM, THE NEXT LINE ITEM, WHICH IS, UH, PROPOSED ARCHES ON OUR ENTRYWAY. UH, THEY WERE ASKING, UH, FOR US TO SHOWCASE A MORE APPROPRIATE ARCH. WE HAD SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT SOFTER AT FIRST. WE DECIDED TO MIMIC, UH, NOT MIMIC, BUT TAKE SOME ELEMENTS, LOOK, LOOK AT SOME OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH I HAVE SOME PRECEDENTS HERE. UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, UH, 1500 SOUTH PRESA THAT HAS SOME ARCHES. UH, IF WE SCROLL DOWN, THERE'S A PROPERTY IN WHICH WE REALLY LIKED OUR CLIENT REALLY LIKED. UM, THESE ARE SOME OTHER EXAMPLES. UM, BUT FLORIDA STREET HAS SOME SIMILAR ARCHES TO WHAT WE'RE DOING. UM, WE DID TAKE A, A DIFFERENT APPROACH TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT, UM, BUT WE'RE KIND OF CURATING THAT SECOND, YOU KNOW, PORCH BEHIND THESE ARCHES, AND WE FELT LIKE IT WAS APPROPRIATE, UH, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THE NEXT LINE ITEM, WHICH IS, OH, IS THIS ACTUALLY THE SAME THING? SAME COMMENT, SORRY. UM, YEAH, LINE ITEM X IS A GARAGE. UM, THIS IS, UH, WE WERE ASKED TO ELIMINATE OUR FRONT, UM, LOADING GARAGE. THIS IS A REQUEST [00:20:01] FROM OUR CLIENT. UM, ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS HERE IS SECURITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, JUST SAFETY WITH MORE CONSTRUCTION AND STUFF GOING ON. OBVIOUSLY IT'S A PRETTY SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THEY DO WANT TO BE ABLE TO HOUSE A VEHICLE. NOW, I KNOW IT'S NOT COMMON TO HAVE FRONT LOADING GARAGES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, HOWEVER, IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS, IT IS NOT TECHNICALLY REQUIRED ACCORDING TO THE, THE GUIDELINES. IT IS STRONGLY DISCOURAGED. IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT STATED THAT WE DO NOT NEED ONE. HOWEVER, UH, WHAT WE DID IS WE TOOK A DIFFERENT APPROACH TO THE OVERALL, UH, AESTHETIC OF THE GARAGE. ORIGINALLY, WE HAD AN ALL GLASS GARAGE, KIND OF VERY TRADITIONAL. UH, WE WANTED TO KIND OF HIDE THIS BY CREATING A, A WOOD FACE TO IT THAT WOULD KIND OF MIMIC THAT KIND OF HIDE WITHIN THE VERTICAL WOOD SIDING. UM, THERE IS A PRECEDENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF SOMETHING SIMILAR. UM, NOT TOO FEW STREETS DOWN ON, UM, RERA STREET. IF WE SCROLL DOWN ON OUR DOCUMENT HERE ONE MORE. UM, THEY TOOK THAT SAME APPROACH WHERE THEY HAVE A HIDDEN, UH, AXIS OR DRIVEWAY, UH, THERE ON THE FRONT FACADE. UH, WE WANTED TO TAKE THAT SAME CONCEPT AND, AND, AND, AND KIND OF STILL GIVE THAT FRONT PORCH LOOK FROM DOWN LOW, BUT ALSO GIVE, UH, GIVE THE, UH, GIVE A STORAGE OR GARAGE, IF YOU WILL, TO OUR CLIENT. AND WE FELT LIKE THIS WAS MORE THAN APPROPRIATE. IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT SAME AESTHETIC AS A TRADITIONAL GARAGE WOULD, AND, UH, WE FELT LIKE THIS WAS, UH, THE RIGHT APPROACH TOWARDS IT. UM, AND THE, AND THE LAST FEW LINE ITEMS, UM, ARE ACTUALLY IN REGARDS TO DRIVEWAY LANDSCAPING AND, UH, FRONT GATE AND FRONT WALKWAY. WE ACTUALLY DID REMOVE, OR WE ASKED THAT WE WERE GONNA REMOVE THOSE FROM, UH, THIS PARTICULAR SUBMISSION. UM, AND WE'LL BE PROVIDING YOU GUYS WITH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN ON THE NEXT ONE, IF THAT, IF THAT WOULD BE ALL RIGHT. UM, BUT OVERALL, THOSE ARE ALL THE LINE ITEMS THAT WERE WITHIN THE, UH, THE DENIAL. UM, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, BUT WE FEEL LIKE OUR, OUR, OUR DESIGN IS MORE THAN APPROPRIATE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU, SIR. UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY VOICEMAILS, SIR? THERE IS ONE VOICEMAIL FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. I'LL PLAY THAT NOW. AND COMMISSIONERS, I BELIEVE THIS WILL LARGELY BE VERBATIM OF THE LETTER IN YOUR PACKETS. THIS IS KATE RUMAN FOR THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, 1146 SOUTH ALAMO STREET REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 6 1 20 CALLAHAN, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO SUPPORTS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AGAINST APPROVAL OF THE CURRENT PROPOSED DESIGN. THE PROPORTIONS OF THE PROJECTING STUCCO CLOUD FIRST STORY AND ITS ARCHED OPENINGS DO NOT APPEAR COMPATIBLE WITH EITHER THE DOMINANT HISTORIC OR MODERN DESIGN AESTHETIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE FRONT LOADING GARAGE IN PARTICULAR IS BASED ON EXCEPTIONS TO THE PREVAILING PLACEMENT OF GARAGES IN THE FRONT OR SIDE YARD AND SHOULD BE DENIED. THANK YOU. THIS CONCLUDES VOICEMAILS. THANK YOU, SIR. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS? APPLICANT'S? I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONER GROUP. I THINK ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT YOU DIDN'T TOUCH ON WAS, UH, THE ADDITIONAL WINDOWS ON FACADES, UH, MARKED IT IN YELLOW ITEM STIPULATION. YOU MENTIONED THAT, UM, YOU'VE REDESIGNED THE TYPE OF WINDOWS, BUT NOT ABOUT ADDING WINDOWS. YOU JUST STATE IN YOUR, IN YOUR, YES. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. IT'S NOT GONNA BE POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE INTERIOR DESIGN. C CORRECT. THERE ARE SOME WINDOWS THAT WE DID ADD FROM OUR DRC AND I'M SORRY, I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THEY DID ASK FOR US TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL WINDOWS ON THE, I GUESS YOU KIND OF WOULD SAY THE 45 OR THE, THE, THE KIND OF, UM, SOMEWHAT SIDE ELEVATIONS. THERE IS ONE ADDED ON THAT UPPER BEDROOM THERE. UH, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS REQUESTED. WE FIGURED WE COULD ADD ONE AND THERE, AND I THINK WE ADDED ONE ON THE MASTER BED BEDROOM SIDE WHERE WE HAVE THOSE TWO. BUT NO, WE, WE DID TRY TO INCORPORATE AS MANY THAT AS WE COULD THAT FOLLOWED SUIT WITH THE FLOOR PLAN AND, AND OUR CLIENT'S, UH, PROGRAM. OKAY. AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION IS, I MEAN, THESE STIPULATIONS ARE AFTER THESE DRAWINGS, RIGHT? THERE HASN'T BEEN DRAWINGS AFTER THAT OTHER THAN MAYBE THE ONE FOOT, THE PER LAB. I MEAN THE, THE INCREASE IN FOUNDATION HEIGHT, UM, OBVIOUSLY ADDRESSES THE STAFF'S COMMENT. UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS BEGUN TO ADDRESS. UM, HOWEVER, UM, STAFF FINDS THAT THERE'S MORE THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED. UM, THESE DOCUMENTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE ARE NOT SO DISSIMILAR FROM A SECOND SET THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED, UH, FOR REVIEW. UM, THE, UH, ITEMS THAT ARE NOTED HERE IN THE FEEDBACK, UH, WE CAN GO THROUGH THESE LINE ITEM BY LINE ITEM AND I CAN GIVE YOU A, A STAFF, UH, JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE CLEAR, UM, ITEM [00:25:01] THE DRIVEWAY IS FINE, BUT YOU DON'T, YOU WANNA POSTPONE? I AM POST ITEM 13 AND 14. YES, THAT IS CORRECT. WE'RE POSTPONING THOSE BECAUSE WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON A LANDSCAPING PLAN. SO TODAY IT WOULD JUST BE, WELL, IT'S NOT ITEM, SORRY. WE'LL STIPULATION ONE TO 12. THAT IS CORRECT. MAKE SURE I GOT MY NUMBERS RIGHT. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? HEARING NONE, MAY I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE? UM, I CAN TRY TO DO A MOTION. THANK YOU. I AM MOVED TO, UM, A DRC. IT'S BEEN MOVED FOR A DRC. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY. SECOND FURTHER DISCUSSION. WELL, UM, I DIDN'T WANNA MOVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION, I DON'T THINK. UM, I THINK YOU'RE, YOU'RE WORKING TOWARDS A FINAL SOLUTION. I THINK YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON A LOT OF THE STIPULATIONS AND I KNOW IT'S BETWEEN YOU AND THE OWNERS. UM, I THINK THE DISCUSSION SHOULD BE, WHICH STIPULATIONS REALLY ARE THE REASON WHY YOU DIDN'T, YOU DON'T GET AN APPROVAL TODAY. IT'S YOUR OPTION IF YOU WANNA GO TO ANOTHER DRC. IT JUST ALSO MEANS MAYBE THERE'S SOME ITEMS THAT NEEDS TO BE WORKED ON. AND I WOULD SAY I, I KIND OF AGREE WITH, UM, WITH THE CONSERVATION SIDE ABOUT THE FRONT LOAD GARAGE. I THINK THERE'S WAYS THAT HAVE BEEN MITIGATED, YOU KNOW, IN, IN LIT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THEY CAN KIND OF BEEN LIKE SUBLIMINAL MM-HMM . WE LOOK AT IT NOW. IT'S A LOT HAVE BEEN CASES WITH MUCH SMALLER LOT WHEN IT'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT MAYBE CHALLENGING TO EVEN HAVE OR A BUSY STREET WHERE THERE'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, NO STREET PARKING. WE DON'T WANT TO CAUSE THAT AS WELL. UM, AND THEN THE ARCHES, I THINK THE GUIDELINES ARE PRETTY CLEAR. IT'S PREDOMINANTLY, I KNOW YOU FOUND CASES, BUT WE GOTTA GO WITH WHAT'S PREDOMINANTLY FOUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND THEN I KNOW THERE'S SOME TWO, TWO STORY HOUSES MAYBE FIRST, NEXT ONE IS, IS THERE A WAY TO LOWER A LITTLE BIT THE HEIGHT MAYBE OF THE SECOND FLOOR? SOMETHING THAT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE THE MASSING, BECAUSE YOU'RE REALLY DOING, IF YOU'RE DOING FRONT SETBACK, RIGHT, ALIGNED WITH THE TWO PROPERTIES RIGHT NEXT TO YOU AND YOU HAVE A TWO STORY, THAT'S WHAT LOOKS LIKE REALLY BIG, RIGHT? SO EITHER YOU PUSH IT BACK MORE MM-HMM . WHICH YOU PROBABLY CAN'T, OR IS THERE A WAY TO LOWER THAT SECOND STORY MASS? AND I THINK THAT IF NOT, ALSO MAYBE SHOW US LIKE SOME APPLICANTS HAVE SHOWED US A COMPLETE MAP OF WHAT'S AROUND AND HOW MANY YOU, YOU JUST GIVE US ADDRESS. WE CAN'T REALLY SEE HOW FAR. I DO HAVE ANOTHER DOCUMENT, SORRY, THAT THERE IS ANOTHER DOCUMENT THAT DOES HAVE ALL THOSE PHOTOS IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THEM. I LET SOME OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, UH, ADDRESS SOME OF THE OTHER STIPULATIONS. THANK YOU. OF THE COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER SAVINO. UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UM, UH, MANY OF MY CONCERNS ARE OUTLINED IN THE STIPULATIONS. UM, ONE THING THAT PROBABLY WASN'T REITERATED WOULD BE MASSING AS IT RELATES TO THE, UH, LOT COVERAGE, UM, RELATIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF YOUR NEIGHBORS. UM, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAKES THIS HOUSE APPEAR EVEN IN THE ELEVATIONS AWKWARD. BUT I WOULD ALSO, UM, UH, STRESS THAT THE PARKING SOLUTION IS NOT TO THE GUIDELINES AND IT'S NOT TO THAT PARTICULAR BLOCK PHASE. AND REMEMBER WHEN WE'RE BUILDING NEW CONSTRUCTION, THE, THE, THE GREAT PART ABOUT NEW CONSTRUCTION IS IT IS NEW AND WE CAN CREATE A NEW PROGRAM INSIDE, BUT STILL THE PRINCIPLE GUIDING PRINCIPLE IS THAT IT DOESN'T JUST TRACK OR DIS DISTRACT FROM THE EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURES. SO IN THAT CASE, WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE ARE APPLYING CONTEMPORARY APPROACHES AND CREATING THAT BALANCE THAT I KNOW YOU'RE SEEKING. SO I THINK A DRC WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL. I'M, I'M OPEN TO A DRC. I DON'T MIND OUR CLIENTS WERE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGES. THEY ARE A SAN ANTONIO NATIVE AND THEY DO HAVE, UH, SOME BUSINESSES DOWNTOWN AND THEY'RE LOOKING TO JUST COME BACK DOWNTOWN. AND SO THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE WANTING TO WORK ON THAT. UH, I'D BE OPEN TO A DRC. UM, I, I WOULD ASK IF WE DO HAVE A-D-R-C-I-I, I DUNNO HOW MANY COMMITTED TRAINERS CAN BE PART OF A DRC, BUT I WOULD ASK THAT WE HAVE, UH, A LITTLE BIT MORE PRESENCE, SO I COULD ASK A LITTLE MORE WORK WITH STAFF CAN COORDINATE THAT. OKAY. SO I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION. THANK, THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONER SERV, DID YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP THEN YOU LOWERED IT. ARE YOU STILL GOOD, SIR? I'M GOOD. I, I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER SAVINO AND COMMISSIONER GROUP COVERED WHAT, WHAT I WANTED TO MENTION, SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. IF THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? CASTILLO? [00:30:01] AYE. SAV A VELAZQUEZ? AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE. GROUP. AYE. SAMANTHAS? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND GIBBS? AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU GUYS. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, PLEASE. OKAY. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN HDRC, CASE NUMBER 2 2 5 0 6 4 30 35. ROOSEVELT, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A DETERMINATION OF NON-CONTRIBUTING STATUS FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT 30 35. ROOSEVELT STAFF RECOMMENDS A, A DETERMINATION OF CONTRIBUTING STATUS FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT 33 5 ROOSEVELT BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH E, THE APPLICANT DENISE ANDERSON IS WITH US IN PERSON. UH, WE DO HAVE ONE LETTER FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO IN FOLDERS. 11 VOICEMAILS IN THREE IN PERSON SPEAKERS. UH, DENISE, YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME UP AT THIS TIME. SO CLOSE. UM, HI. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, WE STAND BEFORE YOU TODAY. WELL, I STAND, GO AHEAD. UM, PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF. YES. OKAY. MY NAME'S DENISE ANDERSON. THIS IS MY HUSBAND JUSTIN ANDERSON, AND WE ARE TWO OF THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY AT 30 35 ROOSEVELT. UM, I STAND BEFORE YOU AS A PROUD, UM, PRODUCT OF THE DISTRICT THREE COMMUNITY. I'M A DESCENDANT OF THE SAN ANTONIO MISSION SAN JOSE, AND A HOPEFUL SMALL BUSINESS OWNER WHO'S DEDICATED TO PRESERVING OUR SHARED HISTORY WHILE HELPING OUR, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD GROW. I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO RECLASSIFY 30 35 ROOSEVELT AS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WITHIN THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT. THIS REQUEST DOES NOT SEEK TO ERASE HISTORY, BUT TO APPLY A FAIR AND ACCURATE STANDARD THAT PRIOR, THAT PRIORITIZES TRULY SIGNIFICANT LANDMARKS IN OUR DISTRICT. I LOVE THIS CITY. I LOVE ITS CULTURE AND ITS HISTORY. OUR GOAL HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO REVITALIZE THIS PROPERTY, STRENGTHEN THE LOCAL COMMUNITY, AND CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. BUT BEFORE ANYONE CAN DO THAT, INCLUDING MYSELF, WE MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THE SIMPLE TRUTH THAT 30 35 ROOSEVELT DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC HISTORIC DISTRICT. IT DOES NOT REFLECT OUR COMMUNITY'S HERITAGE AND KEEPING IT IN PLACE PREVENTS REAL PROGRESS FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND WORK THERE. I'VE, UM, POINT NUMBER 1, 30 35 ROOSEVELT FAILS TO MEET THE STANDARDS FOR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AS A, TO QUALIFY AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THE STRUCTURE MUST HOLD HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL OR CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE, UM, THAT ENHANCES THE DISTRICT'S CHARACTER. THIS BUILDING DOES NOT MEET THAT STANDARD. THERE IS NO INDIVIDUAL HISTORIC RECOGNITION. THERE'S BEEN NO LOCAL STATE NATIONAL AGENCY THAT HAS DESIGNATED THIS PROPERTY AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK. IF THE STRUCTURE IT HELD HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE, IT WOULD'VE RECEIVED RECOGNITION LONG BEFORE 2022. THERE IS NO DOCUMENTED, NO DOCUMENTATION OR ANY KEY HISTORIC RECORDS. THE OHP ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THIS BUILDING DOES NOT APPEAR ON SAN, ON THE SANBORN FIRE. IT INSURANCE APPS, UH, EXCUSE ME, INSURANCE MAPS. THIS IS WIDELY KNOWN AND ACCEPTED TOOL FOR IDENTIFYING HISTORIC STRUCTURES. IT WAS NEVER INCLUDED IN ANY PAST HISTORIC SURVEYS THAT THE CITY HAS DONE IDENTIFYING [00:35:01] AS IT A, IDENTIFYING IT AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT. IT HAS HAD SIGNIFICANT ALTERATIONS THAT HAVE ERASED ITS IN ORIGINAL INTEGRITY. THE ORIGINAL BUILDING FROM 1939 WENT, UNDERWENT MAJOR MODIFICATIONS ACCORDING TO THE OHP. THERE WAS A SERVICE CENTER ADDED IN 1973, AN AWNING IN EXTENSION IN 1983. AND THESE CHA AND THESE CHANGES ELIMINATED THE BUILDING'S ORIGINAL IDENTITY, MEANING THAT IT DOES NOT QUALIFY AS CONTRIBUTING UNDER THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION GUIDELINES. SECOND, IT DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE HISTORIC MISSION, HISTORIC DIFFERENT, UH, MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT'S PURPOSE. THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT EXISTS AND WAS CREATED IN 1970 TO PROTECT AND CELEBRATE THE SPANISH MISSIONS AND THE HISTORICAL LANDSCAPES, NOT GAS STATIONS FROM THE 1940S. THE DISTRICT SIGNI, UM, SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFIES, OR EXCUSE ME, THE DISTRICT FOCUSES ON HIGHLIGHTING SPANISH MISSIONS, THE AQUEDUCTS EARLY AGRICULTURE, NOT MID-CENTURY GAS STATIONS. UM, AND WE HAVE HAD GAS STATIONS THAT HAVE EX, UM, EXISTED ALL OVER SAN ANTONIO. AND YOU GUYS HAVE, UM, A HISTORY OF HAVING THESE REMOVED WITHOUT ANY OTHER ISSUES. THERE WAS A GAS STATION, UH, AT THE LA GLORIA BUILDING THAT YOU GUYS TRIED TO DESIGNATE AS A LAND, AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK, ULTIMATELY WITH THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING THAT, MAKING IT NOT HISTORIC, AND ULTIMATELY HAVING THAT REMOVED THAT RE THAT RE THAT BUILDING RECEIVED HUGE SUPPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY TO SAVE IT AND PRESERVE IT. AND THE CITY STILL ALLOWED THAT TO BE DEMOLISHED. THERE IS NO LARGE COMMUNITY SUPPORT TO PRESERVE THIS BUILDING. WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY AND PROBABLY A VOICEMAIL FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THERE IS NO ONE HERE STANDING UP IN ARMS OVER THIS BUILDING. THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SHOULD REFLECT THE COMMUNITY VALUES, ITS PRIORITIES, AND IN THIS CASE, THE LOCAL RESIDENTS AND THE BUSINESSES THAT, THAT SUPPORT REDEVELOPMENT, NOT PRESERVATION IN THIS STAND, IN THIS INSTANCE, AGAIN, NO MAJOR OUTCRY. INSTEAD, WHAT I HEAR MOSTLY THE THING THAT HAS KEPT US GOING, EVEN AFTER WE'VE SPENT 300,000 OF OUR OWN MONEY TO GET IT TO THE PLACE THAT IT IS NOW COMPARED TO WHAT YOU GUYS SAW TWO YEARS AGO WHEN WE PURCHASED IT, IS CONSTANT QUE UH, QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS TO BE ABLE TO REDEVELOP AND RE MODERNIZE AND BRING THIS PROPERTY INTO SOMETHING THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN, UM, BE PROUD OF. THIRD POINT IS THE CITY DID NOT CONSIDER THIS PROPERTY CONTRIBUTING UNTIL 2022. FOR YEARS, THE CITY, UM, SINCE 1998, THE PROPERTY HAS GONE, HAS, UM, REQUESTED AT LEAST 11 PERMANENT APPLICATIONS. NOT ONE OF THEM HAS TRIGGERED A HISTORIC REVIEW OR CONTRIBUTING STATUS. IF THIS BUILDING HAD REAL HISTORIC VALUE, THE OHP WOULD'VE FLAGGED IT DECADES AGO. THIS IS, THIS INCONSISTENT TREATMENT RAISES A CRUCIAL QUESTION. IF THE CITY AND THE OHP DID NOT CONSIDER THIS BUILDING, UM, CONTRIBUTING FOR DECADES, WHY SHOULD IT BE NOW TODAY, AS EARLY AS TODAY, I LOOKED AT THE OH'S MAP FOR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, AND IT'S STILL NOT LISTED ON THAT. THERE ARE NO CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES FOR ART DECO ANYWHERE IN THE MISSION. UM, OR SORRY, THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT MANUAL SUPPORTS NON-CONTRIBUTING STATUS FOR THIS BUILDING, RIGHT? IT PRIORITIZES THE SPANISH MISSION, EARLY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, NOT BUILDINGS LIKE THIS, UM, STRUCTURE. AGAIN, THE STRUCTURE HAS GONE, UNDERGONE MAJOR MODIFICATIONS. AND BECAUSE THIS BUILDING DOES NOT FALL IN LINE WITH PRESERVING THE SPANISH HERITAGE, IT SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING TO THIS PARTICULAR DISTRICT. IN CONCLUSION, I REALLY ASK FOR YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER THIS AND RECLASSIFY THIS AS NON-CONTRIBUTING FOR THE UNDENIABLE REASONS THAT IT DOES NOT APPEAR AND ANY HISTORICAL RECORDS. UM, ITS ORIGINAL USE THAT THE OHP IS, UM, TYING ONTO HAS NOT, THIS BUILDING HAS NOT HAD BEEN, OR HAS NOT BEEN IN ITS ORIGINAL IDENTITY FOR DECADES NOW, AND THAT REALLY MAKES IT INELIGIBLE TO BE A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. UM, AGAIN, WE HAVE NO SUPPORT OR OUTCRY TO MAKE THIS, UM, [00:40:01] A LANDMARK OR A CONTRI A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. I'M MISSING MY LAST PAGE HERE. SHARE. I WANNA BE CLEAR, I'M NOT TRYING TO ERASE HISTORY. WE'RE HERE TO CARRY THIS PROJECT FORWARD IN A WAY THAT HONORS OUR PAST, MY HERITAGE, WHILE MAKING ROOM FOR A BETTER FUTURE. UM, AND THE REALITY IS THAT THIS OUTDATED BUILDING IS STANDING IN THE WAY OF ANY PROGRESS. UM, WE HAVE, AGAIN, PUT A LOT OF MONEY INTO THIS. WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL, WE'VE WORKED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WE'VE WORKED WITH SOUTH SIDE FIRST. WE'VE WORKED WITH THE SOUTH TEXAS BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP. WE'VE HAD MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH TEXAS BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP, UM, THE EXECUTIVE BOARD WHO ARE VICE PRESIDENTS OF BANKS. WE TO ONLY TO BE TOLD THAT THERE'S NO WAY THAT THEY CAN, UM, GIVE US A COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION LOAN TO RE RENOVATE THIS PROPERTY. THE LOAN TO VALUE RATIO DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. WE'VE NEVER, WE GET ALL THE WAY TO APPLICATION. WE'VE PAID FOR NUMEROUS, UM, ENGINEER, ENGINEER REPORT, OR WE'VE PAID FOR NUMEROUS, UH, APPRAISALS. UM, GOTTEN NUMEROUS, UH, CONSTRUCTION QUOTES. I THINK WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THE VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMERCIAL LENDING AT JEFFERSON BANK EXPLAINING WHY THEY CANNOT LEND TO US. THERE ARE FOUR BANKS HERE LOCALLY THAT HAVE, UM, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS, PUT DOWN, DONE THE WHOLE NINE YARDS OF DIGGING THROUGH ALL OF OUR FINANCIALS, ONLY TO BE TOLD AT THE LAST MINUTE THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THEY CAN DO. UM, THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS BANKS THAT WE'VE SAT DOWN AND THEY'VE GRACIOUSLY PAID FOR OUR MEAL TO LISTEN TO OUR D OUR IDEAS ONLY BE TO BE TOLD THAT PUTTING IN AN APPLICATION ISN'T WORTH OUR TIME OR THEIRS. UM, WE HAVE PUT BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. NO, YEAH. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, STILL CLOSE TO THE BUILDING IS THE DRIVER OF THIS CONVERSATION HERE. SORRY. STEP CLOSER TO THE MIC, PLEASE. OH, I'M SORRY. JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE, WHEN WE'RE HAVING THESE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE BANK, IT'S NOT THE IDEA. IT'S, IT'S WHEN YOU START GETTING INTO THE ESTIMATES FOR THE REBUILD OF THIS AND WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IS ALWAYS THROWING OFF THAT VALUE, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO, TO THE LAND VERSUS THAT VERSE ALONE. SO, UM, THAT'S BEEN THE STICKING POINT. IT'S, I I DIDN'T WANT TO START GOING DOWN A, A RABBIT HOLE THERE. UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE MAIN REASON THIS PROPERTY IS EVEN IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT IS BECAUSE OF THE SAN ANTONIO MISSIONS. UM, UNESCO DESIGNATED THIS AS A WORLD HERITAGE SITE, NOT BECAUSE OF WORLD WAR II OR THESE ART DECO OR, UM, THE GAS STATION HISTORY. IT WAS DUE TO THE MISSION STRUCTURES ITSELF, THE HERITAGE OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE CULTURE OF THE PEOPLE. AND I'M PART OF THE CULTURE OF THE PEOPLE. MY GRANDMOTHER'S HOUSE WAS, UM, TAKEN BY THE STATE IN 1970, RIGHT? THIS COMMISSION, THIS CITY HAS HAD SINCE 1970 WHEN THE DISTRICT, UM, WAS CREATED TO BE A, UM, HISTORIC DISTRICT TO MAKE THIS BUILDING DEEMED AS A HISTORIC STRUCTURE. AND THAT HAS NOT TAKEN PLACE UNTIL I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND TRIED TO GO THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE CHANNELS TO DEVELOP IT. UM, UNFORTUNATELY ALL THAT THIS HAS DONE IS PROVIDE, UM, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ROADBLOCKS, UH, FOR US TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WE HAVE SOME IN-PERSON SPEAKERS. UM, SO I'M READY. PUT THE SPEAKERS, SIR. YES. THE FIRST IS JANE HENRY. SO IF YOU'LL JUST COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE, INTRODUCE YOURSELF, AND THEN EVERYBODY WILL RECEIVE TWO MINUTES. GREAT. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS JANE HENRY. I'M PRESIDENT OF MISSIONS SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND MY ADDRESS IS 5 22 EAST DIXON AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, 7 8 2 1 4. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE BOARD THAT THE COMMISSIONERS THAT, UM, IN 2022, THE, UM, MISSION SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD SENT, UM, A LETTER, UM, TO THIS COMMISSION WHEN THIS, THIS ITEM CAME UP, UM, FOR THE SAME PURPOSE, UM, AT THAT TIME. AND, UM, WE STATED THAT WE DID NOT SEE THAT IT HAD, UM, WE FELT THAT IT WAS HAD NON-CONTRIBUTORY [00:45:01] STATUS. UM, AND THERE HAVE BEEN NO DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THAT TIME THAT WOULD CAUSE US TO CHANGE THAT OPINION. THAT'S, UM, WE WERE VERY, UM, ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT, UH, THE, UH, ANDERSON'S PLANS FOR THIS, FOR THIS PROPERTY. AND, UH, WE UNDERSTAND THEY INITIALLY DID TRY TO INCORPORATE SOME ASPECTS OR ALL OF IT, OF THIS LITTLE BUILDING INTO THEIR PLANS. UM, BUT THINGS HAVE NOT WORKED OUT. AND THERE'S, AS THEY SAY, THERE IS NO, UH, OUTPOURING OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT TO SAVE THIS BUILDING. IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN A, A NIGHTMARE IN AN ALBATROSS. UM, UH, WE JUST, WE HOPE THEY CAN, WE LOVE THAT THEY'RE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY WANT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AND WE LOVED THE PLANS THAT THEY HAD FOR IT AND WE HOPE THAT, THAT THEY CAN PROCEED WITH THAT. THAT'S ALL. THE NEXT IS BRENDA PACHECO. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. I APOLOGIZE FOR MY THROAT. MY NAME IS BRENDA PACHECO. I LIVE AT ONE 18 EAST TOUGH. I'M A VERY, VERY PROUD RESIDENT OF THE SAN JOSE COMMUNITY BECAUSE I'VE BEEN THERE ALL MY LIFE. WHAT DENISE FAILED TO REMEMBER TO TELL YOU WAS THAT SHE IS A 10TH GENERATION CANARY ISLANDER FROM THE ONE OF THE FIRST FAMILIES OF SAN ANTONIO WHO CREATED THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT. SHE'S ALSO LED UPON APACHE. NOW, WE DON'T HAVE DOCUMENTS TO, TO PROVE HOW FAR BACK THAT GOES BECAUSE REMEMBER, THE NATIVE AMERICAN DIDN'T READ OR WRITE IN ENGLISH, UH, OR SPANISH FOR THAT MATTER AT FIRST. BUT WE KNOW THAT HER GREAT, GREAT GREAT GRANDMOTHER WAS LIP UPON APACHE BASED ON DOCUMENTS FROM THE, THE BEAR HERITAGE CENTER. AS SHE MENTIONED IN 1970, THE PROPERTY THAT HER GRANDPARENTS LIVED ON WAS THE SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT MY PARENTS LIVED ON BECAUSE IT WAS A LEGACY PIECE OF PROPERTY. THEY WERE LEGACY HOMES THAT HAD BEEN GIVEN TO THEM BY MY GRANDMOTHER WHO HAD GOTTEN IT FROM AN INHERITANCE FROM HER FAMILY WHO WERE PART OF THOSE FAMILIES THAT RECEIVED LAND GRANTS. OKAY. THEY CHOSE TO HOLD ONTO THE PROPERTIES BECAUSE IT WAS IMPORTANT. IT'S THE SAME SPACE WHERE MY GRANDMOTHER WAS BORN, ACCORDING TO HER TELLING ME WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT IS NOW THE, UM, NPS PARK. OKAY. MUCH SIGNIFICANCE. SHE EVEN HAS A PICTURE. WE HAVE A PICTURE OF THE HOUSE WHERE SUPPOSEDLY SHE WAS BORN. THIS AREA HAS ALWAYS BEEN IMPORTANT TO US. LONG BEFORE IT BECAME A UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE, IT WAS IMPORTANT TO US. 1970, WE GET A LETTER FROM TEXAS WILDLIFE PARKS AND WALL. IT SAYS, SORRY PACHECO FAMILY, BUT YOU GOTTA GO. WE'VE DECIDED WE'RE GONNA BUILD A PARKING LOT IN THE, IN THE SPACE WHERE YOUR HOUSES NOW ARE. UH, IT'S GONNA BE BENEFICIAL TO THE ENTIRE STATE, THE CITY, COUNTY. AND SO HERE IT IS. WELL, BECAUSE MOST OF THE FAMILIES IN THAT AREA WERE LEGACY FAMILIES ALSO. AND IT WAS IN 1930S, FORTIES AND FIFTIES. THEY DID NOT RECEIVE, USUALLY RECEIVE LOANS TO REPAIR THEIR, THEIR LITTLE S 'CAUSE THEY WERE . BUT DADDY WORKED FOR KELLY AND SO HE WAS LUCKY. HE GOT A, A LOAN TO REBUILD. AND WE BUILT THIS GREAT HOUSE. IT WASN'T A MANSION, BUT IT WAS A, IT WAS A NEW HOUSE KNOCKED DOWN THE CASITA. WE BUILT A NEW HOUSE ALSO. WHAT SHE FAILED TO TELL YOU WAS THAT THE, THE GOVERNMENT, THE VA BUILT HER GRANDPA A NEW HOUSE BECAUSE HE WAS A QUADRIPLEGIC, UH, VETERAN. EXCUSE ME. MS. , CAN I ASK YOU TO START WRAPPING UP YOUR COMMENTS PLEASE? OKAY. SO WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY IS THAT BECAUSE I'VE BEEN THERE FOREVER, I TOOK IT UPON MYSELF TO ASK MANY OTHER SENIOR PERSONS WHO WERE MUCH MORE SENIOR THAN ME TO RE TRY TO REMEMBER THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT BUILDING. NONE OF THEM REMEMBER IT BEING ANYTHING BUT A DRIVE, BUT A, A SERVICE STATION. AND THAT'S IT. IT'S A SERVICE STATION. AND SO IN THE OPINION OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT I, THAT I INTERVIEWED AND THE REST OF THE, THE FAMILY MEMBERS, THERE IS NO CONTRIBUTING, CONTRIBUTING STATUS. THERE SHOULD NOT BE CONTRIBUTING STATUS TO THAT BUILDING BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN THERE ALL ALONG. WE, WE SHOULD KNOW. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR ATTENTION. THANKS. OUR THIRD SPEAKER IS ROSEMARY ANGUIANO ZUNIGA, YOU'RE GONNA HELP ME UP. I'M, I'M 90% DISABLED VETERAN . MY KNEES ARE BAD. [00:50:05] GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ROSEMARY ANGUIANO ZUNIGA. I RESIDE AT 2 38 BUSILLO DRIVE, UH, WHICH IS A BLOCK NORTH OF THIS CURRENT BUILDING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. I AM IN SUPPORT OF, OF, UH, DENISE, THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. UM, I LIVE ON LANDS, OH, ACTUALLY I'M A EIGHTH GENERATION DESCENDANT OF PEDRO THE CULT, THE SCULPTURE SURVEYOR, ARTIST OF MISSION, SAN JOSE. UM, MY FAMILY IS PART OF THE PAST, CURRENTLY THE PRESENT AND WILL BE OF THE FUTURE AND IS OF THE FUTURE. UM, I ALSO AM A CANARY ISLAND DESCENDANT, UH, FROM THE FAMILIES THAT ESTABLISHED THE FIRST GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. I GREW UP JUST A COUPLE BLOCKS NORTH OF SAN JOSE MISSION, UM, THAT IS ALSO, WE'RE ACTUALLY JUST RELATIVES THROUGH THE CANARY ISLANDS. UH, SO LIVING THERE AND MOVING BACK, UH, TO MY NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, TRAVELING THE WORLD, 31 YEARS OF SERVICE IN THE MILITARY AND EXPERIENCING, UH, THE THINGS THAT I HAVE, I AM TOTALLY IN SUPPORT. I WAS SO EXCITED TO SEE THE PLANS THAT THEY HAD. HAVING TRAVELED ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES AND SEEING THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED EVEN IN EUROPE, I WAS SO EXCITED FOR THEIR PLANS. UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY, JUST WALKING BY THERE, I COULDN'T EVEN WALK SAFELY FROM MY STREET. A COUPLE, NOT EVEN A BLOCK AWAY WITHOUT BEING AFRAID THAT SOME HOMELESS PEOPLE WERE RESIDING THERE CONSTANTLY. PEOPLE BREAKING IN, SCARY PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T EVEN WALK IN MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT NUMBER ONE SAFETY. AND NUMBER TWO, THEM THINKING THAT I'M A WOMAN OF THE STREETS, UNLESS I'M WALKING WITH MY WALKING STICKS, THEY REALIZE THAT I'M ACTUALLY THERE EXERCISING. SO BY HAVING THAT BUILDING REMOVED OR THE DESIGNATION THAT SHE'S TRYING TO DO, SO IT'S, SHE CAN AFFORD TO DO THE PLANS AND THE DREAM AND THE VISION THAT SHE HAS FOR OUR COMMUNITY IS WONDERFUL. SO, UM, MA'AM THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. NO MORE SPEAKERS. CAN I HAVE VOICEMAILS PLEASE? OH, YOU CLAP FOR ME. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS ALEX VENDER METO AND I AM A RESIDENT BORN AND RAISED ON THE CITY SOUTH SIDE. UH, AND I SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO MAKE 33 5 ROOSEVELT A NON CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. I FEEL IT DOES NOT ADD ANY VALUE TO THE ADMISSION STORE DISTRICT AND KEEPING, IT JUST LIMITS THE GROWTH, UH, OF THE SATELLITE COMMUNITY. SO WE ASK THAT YOU APPROVE ITS REMOVAL SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH NEW OPPORTUNITIES. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS AUDREY CASTILLAS AND I SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO MAKE 30 35 ROOSEVELT A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT AND KEEPING ITS LIMITS GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. PLEASE APPROVE ITS REMOVAL SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH NEW OPPORTUNITIES. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS QUADEL BLOCKY AND I'M SUPPORTING THE REQUEST TO MAKE 30 35 ROOSEVELT A NON DISTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT AND KEEP KEEPING IT LIMITING GROWING IN THE COMMUNITY. PLEASE APPROVE IT TO BE REMOVED SO WE CAN MOVE ON FORWARD WITH OUR NEW OPPORTUNITIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU HAVE TO DO IT. DID I BAD? WHAT DID I SAY WRONG? THAT'S WHAT, HELLO, MY NAME IS DANELLE KNOX AND I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO 30 35 ROOSEVELT. UM, I AM JUST CONCERNED THAT IT'S A KNOCK CONTRIBUTING, UM, I GUESS ESTABLISHMENT AT THE MOMENT. UM, IT'S REALLY AN EYESORE AND I THINK THAT IT NEEDS TO BE RELEASED FROM BEING LABELED AS HISTORIC SO THAT THE COMMUNITY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND, UM, CAN EVOLVE AND JUST, UH, BRING SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA BRING A LITTLE MORE, UM, REVENUE AND JUST BEAUTY TO THE CURRENT COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT WOULD HELP TREMENDOUSLY FOR ALL OF THE PEOPLE AROUND. UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. HI, THIS IS DEBORAH GARCIA. I DON'T HAVE AN ITEM NUMBER, BUT I, UH, AM CALLING IN REGARDS TO MAKE 30 35 ROOSEVELT A NON-CONTRIBUTING [00:55:01] STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT AND KEEPING IT LIMITS GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. PLEASE APPROVE ITS APPROVAL SO WE MAY MOVE FORWARD WITH NEW OPPORTUNITIES. OUR ADDRESS IS 30 95 VALLEY ROAD, SAN ANTONIO. HI, MY NAME IS GREG BUCKLEY AND I SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO MAKE 30 35 ROOSEVELT A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT AND KEEPING IT LIMITS GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. PLEASE APPROVE ITS REMOVAL SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH NEW OPPORTUNITIES. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS CASEY CHAVEZ AND I SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO MAKE 30 35 ROOSEVELT IN NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. IT LIMITS GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY AND IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT. PLEASE APPROVE ITS REMOVAL SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH NEW OPPORTUNITIES. THANK YOU. THIS IS KATE RUCKMAN FOR THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY 1146 SOUTH ALMA STREET REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 7 3 0 3 5 ROOSEVELT AVENUE. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO CONCURS WITH STAFF THAT THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE STRUCTURE RETAINS MANY OF ITS CHARACTER DEFINING ART DECO FEATURES AND RELATES TO THE MISSION MARQUEE DRIVE-IN WHICH CAN BE SEEN FROM THE SITE AND IS A PRIME CANDIDATE FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE. THE 1983 GAS STATION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY THE SOCIETY IDENTIFIED THIS PROPERTY AS POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT. IN ADDITION, THE THE SOCIETY AWARDED A BUILDING GRANT IN 2022 TO THIS APPLICANT TO SUPPORT THE RESTORATION OF THE STRUCTURE. WHILE THAT PROJECT WAS NOT COMPLETED, WE SUPPORT FUTURE ENDEAVORS. THANK YOU. HELLO, THIS IS MARTA ALONZO, BUSINESS OWNER OF FIFTH AND SIT WITH ME COFFEE HOUSE AT 32 44 MISSION ROAD, WHICH SITS ON THE CORNER OF ROOSEVELT AND MISSION ROAD. UM, I AM CALLING ON BEHALF OF 30 35 ROOSEVELT AND I AM, UM, COMMENTING THAT THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING, THIS IS NON-CONTRIBUTING. IT DOESN'T ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION ITS DISTRICT AND KEEPING IT WILL LIMIT GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU MAY CALL ME MARTA ALONZO, SIT AND SIT WITH ME. COFFEE HOUSE TWO TEN FOUR ONE EIGHT. HI, MY NAME IS MARTHA RIO AND I WANNA SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO MAKE 3 0 3 5 ROOSEVELT A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT. IN FACT, IT'S AN IS OR AND KEEPING IT LIMITS GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. LET'S, LET'S CLEAN UP THAT AREA, SO PLEASE APPROVE ITS REMOVAL OF THAT HISTORIC AREA SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH NEW OPPORTUNITIES AND BEAUTIFY THAT MISSION PROJECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. BYE-BYE. HELLO, MY NAME IS MARY ANN GARCIA AND I SUPPORT THE REQUEST TO MAKE 30 35 ROOSEVELT A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. IT DOES NOT ADD VALUE TO THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT AND KEEPING IT LIMITS GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. PLEASE APPROVE ITS REMOVAL SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH NEW OPPORTUNITIES. THANK YOU. AND THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU. UM, CAN THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE? WE'RE GONNA ENTERTAIN SOME QUESTIONS NOW FROM THE, UM, COMMISSION, BUT I HAVE A, UM, QUESTION FOR YOU AS WELL. SURE. UM, WHAT VALUE HAS THE BANKS, THE BANKS THAT YOU'VE SPOKEN WITH, HOW, HOW MUCH, HOW MUCH VALUE HAVE THEY ATTRIBUTED TO THAT PROPERTY? THE ENTIRE PROPERTY OR YEAH, THE BUILDING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. UM, SO WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 2022 AND IT APPRAISED AT 400,000. UM, IT WAS REAPPRAISED AGAIN IN 2023, UM, THROUGH ONE OF THE LOANS THAT WE WERE DOING WITH, I BELIEVE IT WAS SUMMIT BANK AT THE TIME. UM, AND THAT VALUE APPRAISED AT 415. MOST RECENTLY, UM, BROADWAY BANK PUT US IN CONTACT WITH, UM, A COMMERCIAL BROKER BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITH THIS PROPERTY. UM, AS YOU SEE, IT'S BEEN LISTED FOR SALE BY OWNER. UM, COMMERCIAL BROKERS ARE TELLING US THAT THEY DON'T THINK THEY COULD EVEN SELL THE [01:00:01] PROPERTY WITH THAT BUILDING ON IT FOR 350,000. SO WE'VE KIND OF BEEN STUCK, UM, WITH LOSING A LOT OF MONEY THROUGH THIS WHOLE THING. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS MR. CHAIR. GO AHEAD, MA'AM. AND I, THIS IS JUST MORE TO STAFF. SO THIS IS WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CONTRIBUTING OR NOT. RIGHT? THIS IS WHAT THE PURVIEW IS TODAY, NOT ANY OTHER THING. WHY DID, IF WE, SO THE PROCESS IS AFTER CONTRIBUTING, THEY CAN GO AND WE CAN MAKE, PUT A REQUEST FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK AND THEN DEMOLITION AND THEN WE CAN DO, UH, ECONOMIC HARDSHIP, ET CETERA. CORRECT? RIGHT. SO THE CODE HAS A PROCESS WHERE ANYBODY CAN, ANY PROPERTY OWNER CAN REQUEST, UM, A DETERMINATION OF NON-CONTRIBUTING STATUS. UM, AND THAT IT'S USUALLY MADE BY STAFF, BUT IT CAN BE REFERRED TO THE COMMISSION, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY. UM, SO IF IT'S DETERMINED NOT CONTRIBUTING, THAT MEANS THAT IT CAN BE DEMOLISHED, UM, ADMINISTRATIVELY BY STAFF. WE DO THAT WITH ANYTHING THAT'S NOT HISTORIC. UM, IF IT'S DETERMINED AND CONTRIBUTING, THEN WOULD IT COME TO YOU AGAIN FOR THE NORMAL DEMOLITION REVIEW, WHICH IS, AS YOU KNOW, ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OR LOSS OF SIGNIFICANCE. OKAY. IT JUST HASN'T COME TO US SINCE 2022 BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S OWNER INITIATED OR IS IT INITIATED BY? WELL, THE, A DEMOLITION OF THIS STRUCTURE HAS NEVER COME TO YOU. UM, AND SO WHAT YOU SAW TWO YEARS AGO WAS A REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE THAT INCORPORATED THE STRUCTURE. UM, SO DEMOLITION WAS NOT REQUESTED AT THAT TIME. OKAY. SO DEMOLITION REQUEST, THEN WE CAN ACTUALLY LOOK AT ECONOMIC HARDSHIP, COST, ET CETERA? CORRECT. OKAY. AND THEN WHEN SOME, SOME OF THE COMMENTS AND SOME OF THE FINDINGS WAS THAT THERE WAS, UM, IT WAS PART OF THE 2016. I REMEMBER BEING ON THE COMMISSION WHEN WE IDENTIFIED ALL THE GAS STATIONS AROUND THE CITY. BUT MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS NOT EXISTING YET. NO, THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME. UM, SO THAT WAS CREATED IN 1977 AND IT WAS REALLY INTENTIONAL BY THE CITY TO PREPARE FOR THIS BECOMING A NATIONAL PARK. IT WASN'T NATIONAL PARK UNTIL 78. UM, AND SO YEAH, IT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. THE STRATEGY WAS TO CAPTURE A LARGE AREA SO THAT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF REGULATORY REVIEW TO ENSURE, UM, COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA. AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS LOOKING FOR FROM THE CITY AS A PARTNER. UM, SO WE DO KNOW, LIKE THERE'S BEEN DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF GAS STATION SURVEYS THROUGH THE YEARS. AND WE, PER THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, THIS ONE WAS, WAS IDENTIFIED AS EARLY AS 1983. UM, AFTER THE WORLD HERITAGE NOMINATION, WE ALSO CAME BACK AND DID A SURVEY OF THE CORRIDORS AND SO ROOSEVELT AND PRESA. AND SO THIS WAS IDENTIFIED AS SIGNIFICANT AT THAT TIME. UM, BUT REALLY THE FORMAL PROCESS IS THE ONE I DESCRIBED BY THE CODE WHERE ANY PROPERTY OWNER CAN REQUEST THAT HISTORIC ASSESSMENT TO GET A, A DETERMINATION BY STAFF ON CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING. AND BECAUSE THERE WERE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES ON THIS SITE, UM, WE LOOKED AT ALL OF THOSE, OR SORRY, MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON THIS PROPERTY. UM, WE LOOKED AT ALL OF THOSE AND THIS WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT WE SAID WAS CONTRIBUTING. AND SO I BELIEVE THERE WERE FOUR OR FIVE OTHER BUILDINGS THAT WERE APPROVED TO BE DEMOLISHED TO THAT PROCESS. OKAY. CAN I COMMENT AND THEN, UH, NO, I STILL HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. UM, SO IS, HAS, CAN THERE BE A A, A CONSIDERATION OF DEMOLISHING PART OF THE BUILDING AND MAYBE 'CAUSE I MEAN, I CAN SEE FROM THE FOUR, WELL, IT'S LIKE THE FRONT IS WHAT'S IMPORTANT, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT CONTRIBUTING TO THE MARQUEE DRIVEWAY. AND HAVE WE EVER DISCUSSED OR CAN THAT BE DISCUSSED HERE OR WOULD THAT BE IN THE DEMOLITION REQUEST? WE THEN LOOK AT WHAT PARTS OF THE BUILDING CAN BE DEMOLISHED. UM, I, I WOULDN'T SAY IT COULDN'T BE DISCUSSED. UM, IT WAS DISCUSSED ON SITE AND SO I DON'T WANNA GET AHEAD OF THE SITE VISIT REPORT, UM, ABOUT WHAT SOME ALTERNATIVES TO FULL OR TRADITIONAL DEMOLITION, BUT THAT'S NOT PART OF THE REQUEST TODAY. RIGHT. BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE, IT THAT WOULD BE PART OF A DEMOLITION REQUEST, NOT A CONTRIBUTING, NON-CONTRIBUTING REQUEST. TECHNICALLY, I MEAN, ULTIMATELY WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE COMMISSION'S DISPOSITION ON THIS PROPERTY. AND SO I THINK IT IS VALUABLE IF, UM, THE APPLICANT CAN RECEIVE FEEDBACK ON WHAT WOULD BE POTENTIALLY ACCEPTABLE. UM, BUT YES, FORMALLY THE DECISION TODAY IS JUST WHAT IS CONTRIBUTING. IF IT'S CONTRIBUTING OR CONTRIBUTING. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN MAYBE FOR THE APPLICANT, CAN YOU ADDRESS THE GRANTS THAT YOU RECEIVED A COUPLE YEARS AGO? WHAT WOULD THOSE USE FOR? I RECEIVED ONE GRANT, UM, FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, WE AGAIN WENT THROUGH ALL OF THE APPROPRIATE CHANNELS. UM, AND THAT'S WHEN WE RECEIVED THE CONTRIBUTING DETERMINATION FROM THE CITY. UM, AND WE HAD EVERY INTENTION BEING NEW TO THIS AND NOVICE, WE, WE WENT THROUGH ALL OF THE STEPS. UM, WE RECEIVED A GRANT FOR $10,000 TO REPAIR THIS BUILDING. UM, BUT THE ESTIMATES THAT WE'VE RECEIVED ARE OVER 189,000. SO OR HIGHER? YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S THE LOWEST ONE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SANTES? YEAH, REAL QUICK, I GOT TWO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND, AND TWO QUESTIONS AND, UH, YEAH, TWO QUESTIONS. SO IF IT'S, IF WE DETERMINE IT'S NON-CONTRIBUTING, UH, AND THEN LATER THEY CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY DECONSTRUCTED, IS, IS THAT WHAT YOU GUYS WOULD DO ON THEIR OWN, ON YOUR OWN WITH STAFF AND, AND, YOU KNOW, BE ADMINISTRATIVELY, UH, UH, UH, APPROVED AND PROCESS FOR, FOR [01:05:01] DEMOLITION OR DECONSTRUCTION? WOULD YOU STIPULATE THAT YOU GOTTA PRESERVE THAT, THAT ? WHAT, WHAT PRESERVATION, UH, UH, UH, APPROACHES WOULD YOU TAKE TO THAT? UM, YES. SO THE ANSWER TO THE FIRST QUESTION, IF IT'S NOT CONTRIBUTING, THEN STAFF CAN, CAN ADMINISTRATIVELY ISSUE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT. THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH RELEASING THAT. UM, I DO THINK A POTENTIAL OUTCOME TODAY IS YOU COULD SAY THAT ONLY THE FACADE IS CONTRIBUTING AND SO THEN THAT WOULD BE DIRECTION TO KIND OF WORK ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF WHEN A PERMIT'S ISSUED, WHAT DOCUMENTATION STAFF WOULD NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT REMAINS. UM, ALSO TO CLARIFY, DECONSTRUCTION WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED BY CITY ORDINANCE HERE, UM, BUT, UH, SALVAGE OR REUSE OF ANY OF THE COMPONENTS COULD POTENTIALLY BE A MITIGATION STRATEGY TO A DEMOLITION. BUT THAT'S PROBABLY A LITTLE TOO FAR IN THE WEEDS FOR THE QUESTION ON THE AGENDA TODAY. OKAY. AND THEN THE NEXT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. THAT'S VERY HELPFUL. DO YOU HAVE, UH, NOTES FROM THE, I REMEMBER GOING TO VISIT THIS SITE AND I REMEMBER THAT I MIGHT BE WRONG, BUT THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING YOU IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY. WE WENT IN THERE AND I THINK ONLY THAT FRONT FACADE SEEMED TO BE ORIGINAL. AM I WRONG IN THAT? DO YOU HAVE A REPORT FROM OUR VISIT, FROM THAT SITE VISIT? I DON'T THINK WE DO. UM, WHEN WE DID THE HISTORIC ASSESSMENT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO IS WE LOOK AT HISTORIC AERIALS AND, UM, MAPS THAT ARE AVAILABLE. AND SO WE DO BELIEVE THIS IS THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT. THERE WAS AN ADDITION TO THE BACK, UM, THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED AND WAS DETERMINED NOT CONTRIBUTING. AND SO YEAH, RACHEL'S GOT THOSE AERIALS ON THE, ON THE SCREEN. UM, SO NOT A LOT OF DETAIL, BUT WE KINDA LOOK AT THE SHADOW LINES AND, YOU KNOW, WE ASSUME THAT IT HASN'T REALLY CHANGED MUCH. UM, THERE IS STILL A QUESTION ABOUT THE, UM, CONSTRUCTION METHOD OF THE BUILDING, AND SO SOME OF IT'S FRAMED THAT WE CAN SEE. UM, AND THAT FRAME HAS DETERIORATED AND SOME HAS BEEN REPLACED OVER TIME. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FACADE IS MADE OUT OF. UM, WE ASSUME POTENTIALLY SOME SORT OF MASONRY, BUT WE DON'T REALLY KNOW THAT I WOULD ASK ONE OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT WAS THERE, BUT I DO, I I THINK WE WENT IN THERE AND WE DETERMINED THAT THE, THE, THE SIDEWALLS, UH, PORTION OF THE SIDEWALLS, OR IF NOT THE SIDEWALLS IN THE BACK WALL WAS NOT, OR, UH, THE SAME MATERIAL AS, OR, OR THE SAME DATED MATERIAL AS THE FRONT FACADE. BUT I MIGHT BE WRONG. I, UH, COMMISSIONER FETZER AND, AND SAVINO, I THINK WERE THERE. I DON'T REMEMBER WHO ELSE WAS THERE. IT'S DEFINITELY DIFFERENT MATERIALS. I, I DON'T, WELL, WE THINK IT COULD BE DIFFERENT MATERIALS. WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS IT'S ORIGINAL OR NOT . CORRECT. THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY I'M LOOKING FOR A REPORT. I THINK WE MENTIONED IT. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT AND WE POINTED THAT STUFF OUT. UM, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE REPORT IN FRONT OF ME. THANK YOU. WE'LL GET THE REPORT, SIR. THANK YOU. UM, DID YOU HAVE THE, WAS THAT CONCLUDE YOUR QUESTIONS? YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS? I DO, I DO FOR STAFF IS THAT YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES. FOR STAFF, UH, THE, THE, UH, APPLICATION COMES IN FOR A REMOVAL OF, UH, ITS DESIGNATION, BUT NOW IS THAT WITH A, AN ASSUMPTION OR WITH A, A PLAN FOR DEMOLITION? I MEAN, IN THE SENSE THAT THAT, THAT THE APPLICATION COMES IN, YOU INTAKE THE APPLICATION, THE REMOVAL IS PART OF THE DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, OR IT'S JUST AN APPLICATION FOR THE REMOVAL OF THIS, THE SIGNIFICANCE, RIGHT. SO IT DOESN'T REMOVE IT FROM THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, SO ANYTHING THAT COMES IN THE FUTURE WOULD STILL BE REVIEWED AS IT'S IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. RIGHT. UM, SO THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STATUS IS REALLY ONLY AN ANSWER TO A DEMOLITION QUESTION. SO IT INSTRUCTS STAFF ON IF WE'RE ABLE TO ISSUE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT ADMINISTRATIVELY OR IF DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO COME HERE FOR ECONOMIC HARDSHIP AND LOSS OF SIGNIFICANCE REVIEW. OKAY. NOW, IF, IF IT JUST CAME IN AS A DEMOLITION REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION, OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD HAVE A REPLACEMENT PLAN OF SOME KIND, SOME KIND OF A SITE PLAN FOR WHAT NEW DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE. WHY, WHY WOULD IT BE ADVISED THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT FOR THEIR NEW CONSTRUCTION OR THEIR PROJECT WITH THIS LIMITED DEMOLITION IN, IN WHICH CASE WE WOULD BE HEARING, UH, A REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION AS OPPOSED TO THIS, AND THEN WE'D ALSO HAVE, LET'S SAY IT GOT, SAY, SAY IT WENT THE, THE WAY THAT, THE OPPOSITE WAY THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD WANT IT TO GO, AND THEN THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A DEMOLITION. THEY COULD, UM, AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT STOPS THEM FROM REQUESTING DEMOLITION AT ANY TIME. UM, AND OBVIOUSLY IF THEY HAVE A PROJECT THAT NECESSITATES DEMOLITION, THEN THAT COULD COME HERE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THIS COMMISSION, UM, THAT IS A LONGER REVIEW WINDOW. UM, AND MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE APPLICANT IS THEY'RE EAGER TO GET A, UM, DECISION ON, ON WHICH WAY THIS IS GOING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. UM, AND THE APPLICANT [01:10:01] SAID SOMETHING EARLIER THAT I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH IS THAT WHAT IS CONSIDERED, UM, SIGNIFICANT HISTORICALLY IS UP TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, TO DECIDE. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, AND THAT'S WHY WE REFERRED IT HERE FOR THE FIRST STEP OF, YOU KNOW, JUST A, JUST A, A CONCURRENCE OF WHETHER THIS IS CONTRIBUTING IS THE FIRST STEP, BECAUSE THAT'S GONNA INFORM THE PROCESS MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. WELL, MR. CHAIR, IF THERE, IF, IF THE QUESTIONS ARE DONE, I I CAN MAKE A MOTION BEFORE WE DO THE MOTION, SIR, I WANTED TO HEAR FROM COMMISSIONER SENOS AND SHE WAS AT THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, I MEAN DESIGN REVIEW MEETING. SO PLEASE SPEAK ON THAT, PLEASE. OH, OKAY. SURE, MR. CHAIR. UM, WHAT WE OBSERVED WAS A, THE BUILDING WE SEE ON THE PHOTO SMALL BUILDING THAT IS CLEARLY A DECO OF DECO ERA. UM, AND WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GO INSIDE THE BUILDING, WHICH WAS ONE QUESTION WE HAD REGARDING THE CONSTRUCTION METHOD, UM, METHODS AND MATERIALS. UM, SO WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GO INSIDE. WE WERE ABLE TO PEEK IN A LITTLE BIT AND, UM, THE FINISHES OF COURSE ARE GONE. THE INTERIOR HAD BEEN MODIFIED, BUT THE, AGAIN, THE INTERIOR IS NOT ONE OF THE ASPECTS OR CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING CONTRIBUTING STATUS. UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THE ELEVATION, UH, THE DISTINCTIVE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEVATION OF DECO DESIGN, UM, THE SMALL FOOTPRINT INDICATIVE OF A GAS STATION, ITS LOCATION ON THE SITE, UH, DIRECTED TOWARDS THE INTERSECTION AND THE AUTOMOBILE TRAFFIC, UH, WERE PART OF ITS CONTRIBUTING FEATURES, UM, ESPECIALLY AS IT'S RELATED ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE, UM, DRIVE-IN OF APPROXIMATELY THE SAME ERA. THERE'S A BOOM OF CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN THAT IS MEANT TO REFLECT OR RESPOND TO A, YOU KNOW, A MECHANICAL AGE. AND SO THIS WAS PART OF THAT MOVEMENT AT THE TIME, UM, UP THROUGH, I GUESS, UM, ABOUT THE WORLD WAR II. AND SO THE AUTOMOBILE FEATURES VERY, VERY PROMINENTLY IN THIS AREA. UM, AND IT'S PART OF THE CULTURE, IT'S PART OF THE HISTORY. I DON'T KNOW, I HAVEN'T READ RECENTLY THE YOUR HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINE GUIDELINES IN, IN TERMS OF WHAT DEFINES THE CHARACTER AND THE HISTORY SPECIFICALLY. I'VE LOOKED AT ALL OF THE OTHER PARTS OF IT, BUT NOT THE HISTORY. SO THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE HISTORY IN THIS AREA. SO THAT WAS OUR DETERMINATION AT THE TIME, AND AGAIN, IT WAS ONLY THREE OF US, UM, THAT IT IS A REMAINING FEATURE OF A VERY PROMINENT AND QUICKLY GROWING AUTOMOBILE CULTURE. UM, BUT AGAIN, THERE ARE MANY SOLUTIONS TO THIS. MAY I RES RESPOND? PLEASE GO AHEAD, MA'AM. YEAH, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO REVIEW THOSE GUIDELINES, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT'S A DIS THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING. AND WHEN THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS CREATED, AND THE GUIDELINES CLEARLY STATE THAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT DISTRICT IS TO CELEBRATE AND PROTECT THE SAN ANTONIO MISSIONS, THE SPANISH CULTURE, THE AQUEDUCTS, AND THE AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPE. THIS AREA WAS NOT DESIGNATED AS HISTORIC BECAUSE OF THE ART DECO OR THE AUTOMOBILE, UM, BOOM. AT THAT TIME, IS IT WONDERFUL THAT THE CITY WAS ABLE TO COME IN AND TAKE OVER THE, UM, DRIVE-IN THAT I SPENT YEARS OF MY CHILDHOOD GROWING UP AND SITTING OUTSIDE FROM MY GRANDMA'S YARD WATCHING THOSE MOVIES? ABSOLUTELY. I URGE THE CITY TO COME AND TAKE THIS PROPERTY AND RENOVATE IT THE WAY THAT THEY WANT TO AS WELL, IF THAT IS WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WERE TRYING TO PRESERVE WHEN THEY DID THAT. THEY WERE TRYING TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR MISSIONS, AND THIS DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GROUP. YEAH, I JUST HAD ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION. UM, IF WE WERE TO DISCUSS TODAY, UM, DEMOLITION OF LIKE KIND OF THE BUILDING, BUT YOU GUYS KEEPING THE FACADE BEING KIND OF THE, WHAT'S STAFF FINDINGS IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE DRIVEWAY AND THE CORRIDOR, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD OPEN TO? YEAH, IT'D BE OPEN TO CONSIDER ANYTHING. RIGHT. WE, WE ASKED, WE HEARD YOU GUYS ASK ABOUT WHAT THE PLAN IS RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NO PLAN. THERE CAN'T BE A PLAN. I MEAN, THERE'S, BECAUSE OF A PURVIEW TODAY, WE WE CAN'T REALLY INCORPORATE THE PLANS, YOU [01:15:01] KNOW, WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE AND THE FUTURE. BUT I, I'M, I'M OPENLY TELLING YOU, EVEN IF I WAS ASKED TO BRING A PLAN TODAY, I HAVE NO PLAN. THERE IS NO PLAN FOR US OR THIS PROPERTY MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS BUILDING STANDING THE WAY IT IS. WE'VE SPENT TWO YEARS, $300,000 GOING TO BANKS. THERE IS NO PLAN GOING FORWARD AT THIS POINT FOR US. I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION. I'D BE OPEN TO DISCUSSING IT, BUT I COULDN'T EVEN TELL YOU WHAT I COULD DO AT THIS POINT WITHOUT HAVING THIS WEIGHT LIFTED. THANK YOU. UM, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION. OKAY, GO AHEAD. JUST TO FOLLOW UP QUESTION. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, NOT HAVING ANY PLANS, SO AGAIN, MY, MY COMMENT TO THE OBSERVATION HERE IS FROM A HISTORICAL ONE BASED ON OUR UDC GUIDELINES, AND, UM, THAT'S HOW WE, UH, LOOKED AT THE PROPERTY. UH, THIS IS MUCH MORE COMPLEX QUESTION IS WITHOUT PLANS IN PLACE, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE VERY CERTAIN YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO REMOVE THE BUILDING, RIGHT? I MEAN, WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. YEAH. I CAN'T LEAVE IT THE WAY THAT IT IS. DO YOU THINK, UM, BASED ON YOUR PREVIOUS COMMENTS, MIGHT THAT MAKE IT EASIER TO SELL THEN? I HAVE NO, I MEAN, AGAIN, WE PUT $300,000 INTO THIS PROPERTY. I'M NOT MAKING 700 GRAND OFF OF THIS. SURE, SURE. I'M NOT THE, MY GOAL IS NOT TO SELL AS IT IS. I COULDN'T SELL IT AS, AS IT WAS. RIGHT. WE HAVE A COMMITMENT NOT ONLY TO THE COMMUNITY, MY FAMILY, THE, MY GOAL ISN'T TO KNOCK DOWN THIS PROPERTY AND, AND TURN AROUND AND MAKE A QUICK BUCK. AND WHEN I SAY HAVE NO PLANS, DO I HAVE, WE HAVE OUR ORIGINAL PLAN. WE HAVE A LOT OF IDEAS ON WHAT WE COULD MODIFY TO MAKE IT WORK, BUT I CAN'T SAY THAT ANY OF THOSE COULD COME TO FRUITION WITH THIS STANDING IN THE WAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS. MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? YES, SIR. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, UH, IN FAVOR OF APPLICANT WHOSE REQUEST IS, UH, A DETERMINATION OF NON-CONTRIBUTING STATUS FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT 3 0 3 5 ROOSEVELT. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY. THANK YOU, SIR. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY. SECOND, UM, DISCUSSION. WELL, YOU, YOU KNOW, MR. CHAIR, THIS, THIS, I, I DON'T WANT TO, UM, GIVE ANY IMPRESSION THAT, THAT, THAT I TAKE, UH, THIS LIGHTLY. I'VE, I'VE BEEN STUDYING THE AREA, AND THIS CASE IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE I HAPPEN TO BE THE DISTRICT THREE REP ON THIS, UH, OR, OR APPOINTEE, UH, KNOW THE AREA VERY WELL. I KNOW ONE OF OUR OTHER COMMISSIONERS IS FROM THIS AREA AS WELL, BORN AND RAISED. UM, AND, AND I'VE BEEN VERY CRITICAL OF THE AREA FOR SOME TIME NOW, UH, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO, UH, THE MISSION DRIVE-IN AND KIND OF THE DESIGN ENCROACHMENT WITH THE WORLD HERITAGE CENTER AND THE YEAH, PLEASE HAVE A SEAT. OH, SURE. AND, AND THE LIBRARY, WHICH, WHICH CREATES AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS, UM, DYNAMIC AS OPPOSED TO A STATIC, UH, SETTING, A STATIC EXPECTATION FOR THINGS TO BE A PARTICULAR WAY. UM, THE, UM, AND, AND, AND TO NO SHORT DEGREE, I THINK ON MY PART, INCLUDING THE MISSION MARQUEE, UH, THAT THAT WAS DEPICTED A VERY, UM, UM, UH, UH, EXAMPLE OF, OF HOW SOMEONE WOULD MAKE FUN OF THE, THE MISSION PEOPLE. SO THERE'S A, THERE'S A, THERE'S A DYNAMIC IN THAT AREA THAT HAS BEEN, UM, UM, EVOLVING THROUGHOUT TIME. UM, IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE A, A VERY SMALL STRUCTURE THAT SITS IN THE, UM, MID PART OF ONE SIDE OF A PROPERTY THAT CAN NO LONGER BE USED FOR WHAT ITS ORIGINAL PURPOSES. IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT, IF IT WAS A-A-A-A-A, AN ECHO OF THE AGE OF GAS STATIONS, IT'LL NEVER BE A GAS STATION AGAIN FOR EPA REASONS AND OTHER REASONS. AND THEN WHEN WE GET INTO THE DISCUSSION OF SAVING A FACADE, WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT THAT LITTLE VERTICAL PLANE WOULD DO TO THIS PROPERTY AND WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO MAKE THIS, THIS, THIS TINY PIECE OF, OF, UH, OF, OF ARCHITECTURE, UM, UM, TO, TO TO, TO PUT IT INTO A PROMINENT SPACE WITH A, CONSIDERING THAT THERE WOULD BE A DEVELOPMENT. AND WE ALL KNOW THAT A GAS STATION REQUIRES THAT CARS TO GET IN THE FRONT OF IT, THAT LITTLE GAS STATIONS IN THE BACK. SO WE HAVE A SENSE OF THE SPACE, THE LOSS OF ITS HISTORIC INTEGRITY, UM, MORE THAN ANYTHING BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANYTHING IN THAT COMMUNITY THAT RELATES TO IT OUTSIDE OF THE MARQUEE THAT'S BEEN ENCROACHED ON BY THE SPANISH COLONIAL AND ALL OF THAT. UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE GOOD INTENTIONS OF, OF WHATEVER, UH, WE WOULD CONSIDER GOOD DESIGN, AND IT IS A GOOD DESIGN, BUT WHEN YOU GO DOWN ROOSEVELT MUCH HAS ALREADY BEEN REMOVED. IT'S, IT'S VERY QUESTIONABLE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS, [01:20:01] UH, THING IS NOT ONLY CONTRIBUTING, BUT SPEAKING TO ANYTHING THAT ANYBODY COULD SAY IS KIND OF A BREADCRUMB TRAIL OF, OF A, OF A, OF AN ENCLAVE, OF A PARTICULAR COLLECTION OF WHICH JUST DOESN'T EXIST. UM, SO I, I THINK TAKING THAT IN CONSIDERATION AND, AND ALSO JUST, UH, UH, UM, UH, UNDERSTANDING, UH, THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP THAT'S BEEN, UH, COMMUNICATED, UH, WITH THEIR EVIDENCE AND, AND THEN PARTICULARLY THE, THE, THE COMMUNITY'S EXPECTATIONS FOR THEIR COMMUNITY, WHICH I CAN TELL YOU IN THIS CORNER OF SAN ANTONIO, THE FAMILIES GO WAY, WAY BACK. THEY ARE THE CONTRIBUTORS OF THAT, OF THAT CULTURE AND THAT COMMUNITY. AND, UH, IT, IT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT, I THINK WHEN, WHEN THAT COMMUNITY'S STILL ALIVE, THEY'RE STILL CONTRIBUTING AND THEY'RE STILL EVOLVING. SO SUPPORT ALL THE WAY AROUND FOR, FOR, UH, THIS AREA TO CONTINUE TO EVOLVE IN A WAY THAT MAKES IT PRODUCTIVE FOR THAT AREA, THAT HARLANDALE AREA AND THE MISSIONS AREA. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. YEAH, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH, UH, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER THERE. I, I TOO GREW UP IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE RODE MY BIKE UP AND DOWN THAT, THAT BLOCK THERE. SO, UH, I THINK THE COMMUNITY IS SPEAKING TO ME. I MEAN, YOU HAVE AN OVERWHELMING, UH, SUPPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY TO, TO MOVE ON WITH THIS PROPERTY IS, IS AS QUAT AS IT IS. UH, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FROM STAFF IF THERE'S A, A WAY TO PRESERVE THE DIMENSIONS AND, AND PRESERVE A LITTLE BIT OF THAT FACADE EITHER IN, IN, IN THE FILE FOR THE PROPERTY. THAT WAY IF, IF, UH, YOU KNOW, IF, IF, IF THERE IS A WAY TO PRESERVE IT DOWN THE LINE AND THEY, THEY HAVE AT LEAST SOME DOCUMENTATION OR TO PAY HOMAGE TO IT OR SOMETHING WITH WHATEVER HAPPENS IN THE FUTURE. BUT I KNOW THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT IS NOT AS, AS QUAINT AS IT IS, IT'S, IT'S IT REALLY IN KIND OF IMPRACTICAL TO KEEP IT. SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY TAKE. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SO YES, COMM, UH, MR. CHAIR? SURE, GO AHEAD. SO WITH THAT COMMENT, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M LEANING. UM, IF THERE'S A WAY TO, UM, THE FACADE IS PROBABLY WHAT'S, I UNDERSTAND THE BUILDING ITSELF, AND THERE'S NOT MUCH PART OF THE PROPERTY ANYWHERE, ANY, NOTHING LEFT OF THE PROPERTY. BUT I, THE PART MAKE IT CONTRIBUTING BASED ON THE COMMENTS AND THE FINDINGS IS IT'S THE MISSION MARQUEE, THE DRIVE. WHEN THAT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, THAT PROXIMITY IS GIVING YOU THAT CONTRIBUTORY STORY, WOULD THAT BE AN AMENDED MOTION? IF I CAN MAKE AN AMENDMENT AMENDED MOTION AND THEN SEE IF THAT GOES? YES, I BELIEVE YOU CAN. I JUST DON'T KNOW. UH, BASED ON THE, UM, SO IT WOULD BE, UM, A MOTION TO REMOVE THE CONTRIBUTORY SIGNIFICANCE, BUT WITH A REQUEST TO DEMOLISH, BUT KEEPING THE FACADE, I THINK READING YOUR MIND, I THINK THE MOTION WOULD BE, UM, ONLY HAVE CONTRIBUTING APPROVAL OF NON-CONTRIBUTING STATUS FOR EVERYTHING BUT THE FACADE. OKAY. AND THEN WE COULD FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT MEANS FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT. UM, JUST IN RESPONSE, LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN IS YES, LIKE IF THE WHOLE THING IS APPROVED FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING, WE LOSE OUR ABILITY TO KIND OF REGULATE WHAT HAPPENS IN TERMS OF HOW THE DEMOLITION OCCURS. WELL, I'LL DO A MOTION TO FIND THAT THE ONLY CONTRIBUTING PART OF THE BUILDING WOULD BE THE FRONT FACADE. IS THERE A SECOND? A SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND FOR THE DISCUSSION ON THAT. I, I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT, JUST IF I CAN SURE. WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION, SIR? YEAH, MY QUESTION WOULD BE, SO WOULD THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO, YOU KNOW, DOCUMENT IT, TAKE DIMENSIONS, UH, MOVE IT IF NECESSARY, CORRECT, OUT OF THE WAY AND, AND READJUST IT IF NEEDED? CORRECT. THEY COULD STILL RETURN TO THIS COMMISSION WITH A REQUEST FOR FULL DEMOLITION. UM, THEY COULD COME BACK AND SAY, ACTUALLY WE WANNA RECONSTRUCT IT AND IT'S GONNA LOOK THE SAME. UM, IT WOULD JUST EXTEND OPTIONS FOR WHAT HAPPENS THERE, UM, THAT WOULD REQUIRE FURTHER HCRC REVIEW. WELL, AND I GUESS THE, AND I'M SORRY. UM, WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE IN ANOTHER PROPERTY THAT KIND OF ALSO WAS, BUT WE WERE GOING MORE WITH THE ECONOMIC HEART. YOU DIDN'T GO FOR DEMOLITION, SO WE COULDN'T GO OVER THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP AND GO THAT DOWN ROUTE. I THINK YOU HAVE VALID CASE FOR ECONOMIC HARDSHIP, BUT WE'RE NOT THERE. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE OUTCOME OF THAT DEMOLITION REQUEST AND ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. SO I THINK LIKE MAYBE SAVED YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THAT TIME AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN YOU SEE WHAT YOUR NEXT STEPS ARE. [01:25:04] MR. CHAIR. OKAY, SIR. MY, MY CONCERN WITH THE MOTION WITH, WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, SECOND MOTION IS THAT ONE OF THE COMPELLING PIECES OF, UM, OF, UM, THE TESTIMONY IS THE LETTER THAT THEY PROVIDED FROM THE BANK AND IN, IN THAT, EVEN TO PLAN OR TO SPECULATE IF, IF THERE, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THE FINANCES IN FRONT AS WELL, THAT IT'S SETS IT UP FOR A CASE FOR ECONOMIC HARDSHIP, IN WHICH CASE WE CAN PRESUME THAT THAT WILL BE THE CASE. SO IT SEEMS THAT, THAT GETTING AHEAD OF IT, UM, IT, IT, IT ENDS UP BEING, UM, EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. SO IT'S, THERE'S A SHORTER PATHWAY FOR THE APPLICANT TO, UM, TO MOVE FORWARD AND TO, TO DO WHAT THEY FEEL IS IN THEIR INTEREST WITHOUT US CREATING, UM, INEVITABLE IMPEDIMENTS TO KNOCK DOWN. SO, UH, I, I WON'T SUPPORT THE MOTION. I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION AND I THINK THE MOTION IS, IS, IS A GOOD MOTION, BUT I WOULD, UH, UH, FROM, FROM, FROM MY OPINION THAT IF IT WAS A MORE SIGNIFICANT, UH, ELEVATION, UM, BUT THIS, I I, I KIND OF FEEL LIKE YOU CAN SEE FROM THE REAR OF THE BUILDING THE AMOUNT OF ROT THAT HAS GONE IN. AND ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT STUCCO BUILDINGS IS THAT EVERYBODY THINKS THAT THERE'S NICE STRONG STRUCTURE INSIDE OF A STUCCO, UH, DETERIORATED STUCCO STRUCTURE. BUT WHEN YOU GET IN THERE, YOU FIND THAT ALL THE WOOD IS ROTTEN AND THE ONLY THING THAT'S HOLDING UP IS THE STUCCO SHELL. SO I'M PRETTY, PRETTY CERTAIN THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GONNA END UP SEEING. AND SO IT AMOUNTS TO A RECONSTRUCTION, SO TO SPEAK, WHERE YOU TAKE ONE WALL DOWN, PICK IT UP, TAKE ANOTHER WALL DOWN, PICK IT UP, AND GO THROUGH THAT WHOLE PROCESS WHEN IT STILL DOESN'T ADDRESS HOW A PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNED FOR A GAS STATION USUALLY ONLY SERVES THE PURPOSES OF A GAS STATION. THAT'S WHY TIRE SHOPS END UP IN THERE. AND OTHER THINGS THAT SEEM LIKE GAS STATION LIKE, UH, STRUCTURES THAT IN REALITY, THEY CAN REALLY MAKE A PROPERTY UNUSABLE TO A CERTAIN EXTENT IF YOU HAVE TO WORK AROUND THE, THOSE OLD SCHOOL TINY BUILDINGS THAT DIDN'T EVEN HAVE AN ATTENDANT INSIDE OF THEM. SOMETIMES THEY JUST HAD, UM, A, UH, A COMPRESSOR. UM, SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING IT. I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE ORIGINAL MOTION. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. THANKS COMMISSIONER. ESP. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UH, I WANTED TO JUST MAKE SOME COMMENTS AND DISCUSS AMONGST OURSELVES ABOUT, UM, HOW THAT THOUGHT OF PRESERVING THE ELEVATION COULD BE, UM, MODIFIED. FOR INSTANCE, I WOULD PERHAPS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE, THE ELEVATION BE USED RECONSTRUCTED, SAME SIZE, UM, SAME DIMENSIONS, PROPORTIONS, SOMEWHERE ON THE PROPERTY MOVING FORWARD SO THAT IT WOULD ALLOW THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT TO BE PRESERVED, BUT IT WOULDN'T LIMIT WHERE IT WAS USED. IT WOULD THEN FREE UP THE FLOOR PLAN. AND THE, THE WAY THE LOT COULD BE USED RATHER THAN KEEPING IT IN SITU WAS THE, I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WANNA GO, BUT I'M, I'M SURE THAT WE CAN WITH ANY MOTION. SO I THINK IT JUST COMES DOWN IF WE, IF WE JUST HEAR THE ONLY, THE ONLY THING WE LOOK AT IS IT'S THE SAME CONCLUSION, RIGHT? WE FIND THE FRONT FACADE CONTRIBUTING THE REST, NOTHING. THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE SHOULD BE IF WE, AND STOP, IF WE FIND THE FRONT FACADE CONTRIBUTING, THEN IN LATER WHEN THEY COME WITH THEIR PLANS AND ALL THAT, THEN WE CAN DECIDE OF A RECONSTRUCTION OR DISPLACEMENT OR MOVING IT FURTHER DOWN. THAT'S THE CASE. OR HOW DO WE, I MEAN, RIGHT. SO THE, BUT THE OTHER, BUT THE OTHER ASPECT IS THE FRONT FACADE IS LOCATED ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. IN THIS PARTICULAR LOOK LOCATION, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF BEING ABLE TO MOVE. UH, THE, THE F FACADE IS NOT TIED TO THE LOCATION. WE'RE WHEN WE'RE ONLY GIVING THEM A CONTRIBUTING STATUS TO THE FACADE. WE'RE NOT GIVING ANY GUY THAT THEY CAN'T MOVE IT OR ANYTHING THAT'S GONNA BE IN THE SECOND PLAN. SEPARATE. SEPARATE AND A PART OF WHERE IT IS IN THE PLAN, RIGHT? YES. WELL, MR. CHAIR MIGHT, MIGHT I ASK, UH, COREY TO EXPLAIN THAT SO I CAN UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT THAT MOTION IS? OKAY. IF, UM, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ'S MOTION IS APPROVED, UM, SPEAK LOUDER PLEASE. YEAH, I'LL GET CLOSER TO MIC. IF COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ'S MOTION IS APPROVED, THEN THIS BUILDING COULD BE DEMOLISHED TOMORROW WITH NO SORT OF REQUIREMENTS [01:30:01] FROM ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONER STAFF. WE WOULD JUST ISSUE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IF A PORTION OR ALL OF THIS IS DETERMINED TO BE CONTRIBUTING, IF THAT'S THE OUTCOME, UM, THEN ANY FUTURE DEMOLITION WORK OUTSIDE OF WHAT HAD BEEN DETERMINED, CONTRIBUTING WOULD HAVE TO COME HERE. UM, AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT HAS TO BE, DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING HAS TO HAPPEN SPECIFICALLY. IT JUST MEANS WE CAN'T ISSUE A DEMOLITION PERMIT ADMINISTRATIVELY. SO THEY CAN COME BACK AND SAY, WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO TAKE THIS DOWN, BUT WE'RE GOING TO RECREATE THE FACADE HERE. WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO TAKE THIS DOWN AND WE WILL REBUILD IT. EXACTLY. OR WE WOULD STILL LIKE TO TAKE THIS DOWN AND DO SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ON THE SITE. UM, NOTHING WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM MAKING THAT FEATURE REQUEST. AND SO THE ONLY DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO MOTIONS IS WHETHER OR NOT THE ENTIRE BUILDING COULD BE APPROVED FOR DEMOLITION TOMORROW WITH NO FURTHER REQUIREMENT OR REVIEW FROM THE COMMISSION. MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION. IF HE'S DONE, UH, SIR. SO HOW DO WE GET TO, HOW DO WE GET TO WHERE WE CAN APPROVE THEM TO COME BACK TOMORROW ADMINISTRATIVELY, BUT STILL HAVE THEM PRESERVE EITHER DOCUMENT TO DETAIL FOR FUTURE USE OR, OR PRESERVE THAT FRONT FACADE? I'M THINKING EITHER OF THE TWO, HOW DO WE GET THAT DONE TODAY? SO IF THE ENTIRE BUILDING IS DETERMINED, NON ATTRIBUTING, I DON'T THINK TECHNICALLY WE CAN REQUIRE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL. UM, I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT COULD PROPOSE A DOCUMENTATION STRATEGY THAT COMES HERE AND SO THAT IT'S IN PLACE. UM, BUT THE, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE CAN'T REALLY ENFORCE THAT. WE CAN ONLY ENFORCE WHAT HAPPENS WITH A CONTRIBUTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE. AND SO IF A PORTION OF THIS IS DETERMINING, CONTRIBUTING, SO JUST THE FACADE THAT GIVES THEM A LITTLE DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A PLAN, UM, THAT RETAINS OR INCORPORATES THAT DESIGN OR ACTUAL FACADE INTO FACADE INTO A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, OR THEY COULD STILL REQUEST FULL DEMOLITION, BUT THAT WOULD COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. SO THEN WHATEVER HAPPENS, 2, 3, 4 YEARS FROM NOW, FIVE, 10 YEARS FROM NOW, IF THAT FACADE IS DETERMINED TO BE CONTRIBUTOR, ONLY THE FACADE, WHOEVER'S ON THIS PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND SAY, HEY, I WANT TO BUILD A YOGA SHOP OR WHATEVER. YOU KNOW, AND, AND, AND, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO INCLUDE THIS FACADE EVEN IF IT FELL DOWN OR, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS DESTROYED BY, BY A TRUCK OR SOMETHING. THEY'D HAVE TO INCLUDE THIS FACADE OR THIS DESIGN, UH, INTO THEIR PLANS. YES. I MEAN, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REQUEST ANYTHING THAT INVOLVES IT TO THIS COMMISSION. MR. CORY, UM, MR. CHAIR, BUT JUST, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE. ACCORDING TO WHAT COMMISSIONER JIMMY JUST SAID, IF IT FELL DOWN AND IT WAS NO LONGER THERE, THERE WOULDN'T BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO RECONSTRUCT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT THERE TECHNICALLY. RIGHT? SO SOMEBODY STOLE IT. , YES. OBVIOUSLY ACTS OF GOD HAPPEN AND THERE'S EMERGENCY DEMOLITIONS, THERE IS PROCEDURE FOR THAT. UM, AND TECHNICALLY NO DEMOLITION IS REALLY SUPPOSED TO BE APPROVED WITHOUT OF A HISTORIC LANDMARK WITHOUT THIS COMMISSION SEEING IT. BUT THERE ARE EMERGENCY SITUATIONS THAT WE DEAL WITH ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. THANK YOU. UM, THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION. WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON FIRST THE AMENDED MOTION. SO MAY I HAVE ROLL CALL PLEASE? CASTILLO? AYE. SAVINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ NAY GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES, NO, HOLLAND. AYE. AND GIBBS? AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU CAN, SO THE AMENDED MOTION MEANS BECAUSE I DON'T UNDERSTAND MA'AM. MA'AM, UM, ONE MOMENT PLEASE. SO DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT SOMETHING? I STILL UNDERSTAND WHAT JUST HAPPENED. SO THE AMENDED MOTION HAS BECOME THE PRIMARY MOTION AND HAS PASSED. WE DON'T NEED TO VOTE AGAIN. AND SO THE COMMISSION HAS DETERMINED THAT ONLY THE FACADE IS CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING. AND SO THE REQUEST THAT INVOLVE FULL DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDING, INCLUDING THE FACADE, WOULD STILL HAVE TO COME BACK HERE. UM, BUT NOW YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY AND YOU'VE HAD COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS ABOUT, UM, WHAT THEY KINDA EXPECT TO SEE MOVING FORWARD. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? THANK YOU. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSIONERS OR FOR STAFF? 'CAUSE WE CAN DO THAT. YOU CAN [01:35:01] STEP UP TO THE PODIUM. MA'AM. I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND, ARE WE STILL ABLE TO APPLY FOR THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP NOW? YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, PLEASE. IS THERE THAT YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, MA'AM? THE CASE HAS CONCLUDED. DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT SOMETHING? NO, JUST COMMENT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT STEP OUT TO THE MIC, MA'AM. I KNOW THE DIRECTION OF THE MOTION CHANGED AND BASED ON INFORMATION FROM MS. SAVINO ABOUT THE FACADE BEING, UM, KIND OF ART DECO PAYING HOMAGE TO THE ERA OF THE AUTOMOBILE. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT AND THE AUTOMOBILE? YES. YES. OKAY. SO MY COMMENT IS, YOU CHAIRPERSON IS THAT IF YOU KNEW THE MAKEUP AND DEMOGRAPHICS OF THAT COMMUNITY BACK WHEN IT WAS FIRST BUILT, YOU WOULD KNOW THAT PROBABLY MOST OF THE COMMUNITY WAS NOT ABLE TO PURCHASE THAT TYPE OF VEHICLE THAT WOULD HAD, THAT WOULD HAVE, UM, THE UM, KIND OF DESIGN OF THAT ARTICLE PIECE, JUST SO YOU KNOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MA'AM. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT HDRC, CASE NUMBER 2025 DASH 5 0 5 2 3 32 FLORIDA STREET. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE CONSTRUCTING APPROXIMATELY 190 SQUARE FOOT COVERED SIDE PORCH ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURES EAST SIDE WITH STEPS TWO, CONSTRUCTING AN APPROXIMATELY 19 SQUARE FOOT REAR PORCH ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE SOUTH SIDE WITH STEPS. AND ITEM THREE, CONSTRUCTED APPROXIMATELY 19 SQUARE FOOT COVERED SIDE PORCH ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURES WEST SIDE WITH STEPS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE BASED ON THE FINDINGS, UM, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULA STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE A OR THAT THE PROPOSED DEPTH OF THE EASTERN PORCH BE REDUCED TO MATCH THEIR ORIGINAL PORCH DEPTH OF APPROXIMATELY EIGHT FEET. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALL PORCH DECKING FEATURING ONE BY THREE TONGUE AND GROOVE MEMBERS LAY PERPENDICULAR TO THE ATTACHED WALL PLANE. THREE, THAT THE NEW WOOD COLUMNS BE A MAXIMUM OF SIX BY SIX INCHES AND WIDTH AND FEATURE A TRADITIONAL CAP AND BASE IN SHAFER CORNERS. FOUR. THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLED FOUR SKIRTING TO MATCH HISTORIC SKIRTING ON SITE FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE UPDATED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND COURT INCORPORATING STIPULATIONS PROVIDED BY THE HDRC FOR FINAL REVIEW BY STAFF PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. AND SIX, THAT THE APPLICANT MEET ALL SETBACK STANDARDS AS REQUIRED BY CITY ZONING AND OBTAINED A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IF APPLICABLE. THE APPLICANT, NATE MANFRED IS HERE IN PERSON. THERE'S NO LETTERS AND NO UH, VOICEMAILS. MR. MANFRED, IF YOU WANNA APPROACH AND, UH, PRESENT YOUR CASE. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS NATHAN MANFRED. I'M WITH FRENCH OF MICHIGAN AND I'M HERE TO REPRESENT 3 3 2 FLORIDA. UM, READING ALL THE STIPULATIONS, I THINK WE AGREE WITH ALL OF THEM. THE MAIN POINT OF CONTENTION FOR ME TO BE HERE TODAY IS THE SIZE OF THE EASTERN PORCH. UM, THE FRONT PORCH ON THE HOUSE IS EIGHT FEET DEEP, WHICH IS A GREAT PORCH FOR PUTTING CHAIRS OUT AND SITTING AND ENJOYING ONE ANOTHER. BUT THE OWNER'S INTENT FOR THIS SIDE PORCH IS TO HAVE KIND OF A DINING COVERED DINING PORCH AREA. IT'S RIGHT OFF OF THE, UH, EXISTING DINING ROOM. THERE'S SOME EXISTING DOORS THERE. SO THE GOAL IS JUST TO BUILD A PORCH OFF OF THERE THAT WAS LARGE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE A TABLE AND CHAIRS. UM, IT'S A COUPLE THINGS TO NOTE. IT IS SET BACK APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET FROM THE FRONT EDGE OF THE PORCH, LIKE FROM THE FRONT EDGE OF THE HOUSE THERE ALL THE WAY BACK. AND IT'S, UM, ALMOST LIKE 76 FEET FROM THE STREET OR FROM THE SIDEWALK. ANOTHER THING TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE GRADE UP FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS APPROXIMATELY 20 TO 10 INCHES HIGHER THAN THE SIDEWALK AND THE STREET. SO, YOU KNOW, IN OUR OPINION, WE DON'T THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT'LL OVERWHELM THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE. UM, THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THE DESIGN IS THAT WE HAVE MADE SURE THAT THE ROOF IS BELOW THE WIDE 10 INCH BAND OF TRIM THAT RUNS ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT SEPARATES THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR. UM, BUT UH, YOU KNOW, ASIDE FROM THAT, ALL THE OTHER STIPULATIONS WE CONCUR WITH, THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT. I HAVE ONE QUESTION, MR. CHAIR. HOLD FOR ONE SECOND. COMMISSIONER GROUP COMMISSIONER SABINO, GO AHEAD. UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. ONE QUESTION IN YOUR DESIGN PROCESS, UM, AND LOOKING AT THAT EAST PORCH, DID YOU [01:40:01] TRY LOOKING AT INSTEAD OF A GABLE ROOF, JUST A A HIP ROOF? WE SO THAT THE EDGE WOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHAT REDUCED IN SCALE WE COULD CONSIDER THAT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE OWNERS WOULD HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH. I MEAN, WE DIDN'T DIS I MEAN I LOOKED AT IT IN THE PROCESS. THE OWNERS KIND OF WERE A LITTLE BIT HANDS OFF ASIDE FROM THE SIDE AND JUST FELT IT KIND OF MIMICS SOME OF THESE OTHER, YOU KNOW, GABLES THAT WERE COMING OFF THE HOUSE. BUT I, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK ANYONE AT THIS POINT WOULD, YOU KNOW, HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH DOING A HIP ROOF, IF THAT'S SOMETHING MM-HMM . THAT WAS PREFERABLE. YEAH, IT SEEMS TO GO WITH SO MANY OF THE OTHER ROOF FORMS ON THE MAIN HOUSE THANK COMMISSIONER GROUP. YEAH, I WAS KIND OF LOOKING AT IT. UM, JUST FROM A BIT. SLIDE 12. WHAT'S THE WIDTH OF THE PORT CHE COMPARED TO THE PORTAGE SHARE IS ACTUALLY, I HAVE A DIMENSION ON THERE THAT'S ACTUALLY WRONG. SO THE PORK SHARE STARTS AT THE EDGE OF THE PORCH, WHICH IS ACTUALLY WHERE THE COLUMN IS A LITTLE TO THE LEFT OF MY DIMENSION LINE. SO THAT THAT COLUMN THERE, THE PORCH ACTUALLY COMES STRAIGHT DOWN THERE. SO THAT'S ACTUALLY AN 18 FEET FROM THAT EDGE TO THE EDGE OF THE PORT COHA. WHERE WOULD THE 14 FEET END WHERE THE HOUSE ENDS OR PAST THE FIRST COLUMN? UM, I'M SORRY, ON THE OTHER EDGE, UH, THE PORT CO SHARE. OH, SO THE PORTIER IS THAT EDGE OF THE COLUMN TO THE OUTSIDE EDGE THAT'S 18 FEET. AND MY OTHER QUESTION IS THE STAIRS MIGHT ALSO VISUALLY MAKE IT LOOK BIGGER. IS THERE AN OPTION TO PUT THE STAIRS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS? I COULD DISCUSS IT WITH MY CLIENTS. YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT. I THINK THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT. LIKE I SAID, I THINK THE MOST CRITICAL THING IS JUST HAVING THAT COVERED OUTDOOR SPACE FOR OUTDOOR DINING RIGHT OUTSIDE THEIR DINING ROOM. OKAY, THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE, APPLICANT? I MAY I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. SURE. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT, UH, TO INCLUDE HIS AGREEMENT TO A HIP ROOF, UH, AND UH, TO, FOR, TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO STUDY, UH, CONSULT WITH HIS CLIENT ABOUT SHIFTING THE STAIRCASE FROM THE ELEVATION AS SHOWN TO THE OPPOSITE ELEVATION ONE. JUST, I'M SORRY, ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION. ONE MOMENT PLEASE. AND, AND ALSO, WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER ITEMS? DO YOU WANNA INCLUDE THAT IN YOUR MOTION? WELL, JUST, JUST AS HE, HE, HE, UH, UH, INDICATED THAT THEY WERE ALL RIGHT WITH ALL THE OTHER STIPULATIONS. SO YOU STILL NEED OKAY. WITH ALL OTHER STIPULATIONS WITH, WITH ALL OTHER STIPULATIONS. RIGHT. SO, SO STAFF, SO HE'S GOT THE SIZE, HE'S REQUEST REQUESTING THE HIP ROOF THAT, THAT COMMISSIONER SAVINO IS SUGGESTING AND THAT THEY WILL STUDY THE STAIR IN THE FRONT TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE. SO ARE YOU STATING FOR ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS, SIR, JUST WANNA BE CLEAR, LET'S JUST DO ITEM NUMBER TWO AND THREE WITH STAFF STIPULATION. AND THEN YOU'RE ONLY REQUESTING, WELL THAT FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE. EXACTLY, IT'S JUST, I HAVE THE PICTURE UP, I'M USING THE PICTURE. SO, UM, APPROVAL WITH, UH, ITEM NUMBER ONE AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. ITEM NUMBER TWO WITH ITEM NUMBER THREE, WITH ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WITH ITEM NUMBER FIVE AND SIX, AND INCLUDING COMMISSIONER ENO'S, UH, UH, REQUEST FOR HIP, UH, CONFIGURATION IN THE ROOF AND TO, UH, UM, HONESTLY, UH, CONSULT WITH THE APPLICANT FOR THE, UH, THE REVERSE, UH, ORIENTATION OF THE STAIRCASE. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, OR WEST. I I UNDERSTAND, BUT YOU'RE, YOU, WE HAVE TO BE CLEAR ON OUR MOTION. SO LET'S, LET'S, I CAN TRY IF YOU WANT ME TO, YOU WANT TRY, HAVE SOMEONE ELSE TRY BECAUSE YOUR, YOUR MOTION WASN'T REALLY CLEAR. SO IF YOU, IF YOU WANNA TRY IT AGAIN AND BE WELL, I WAS JUST SAYING TO, TO ALL, ALL I WAS SAYING WAS AS PRESENTED BY APPLICANT AND WHEN APPLICANT PRESENTED, HE SAID THAT THEY WERE ALL RIGHT WITH THE OTHER STIPULATIONS OTHER THAN ONES THAT HE MENTIONED. SO WE CAN MAKE IT MORE SPECIFIC THAN THAT, BUT I THINK I FIND THAT TO BE VERY SPECIFIC, BUT YES SIR. HOWEVER YOU SEE IT FIT. I'M, I'M GONNA, I WANNA GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY, SIR. SO IF YOU, IF YOU WANNA STATE YOUR MOTION CLEARLY I MOVED, YOU KNOW, BLAH BLAH BLAH. SO CAN WE DO THAT? IF NOT, I MEAN, WE NEED TO MAKE IT CLEAR FOR STAFF. SO IF WE CAN DO THAT, WE GREAT. IF NOT, THEN I CAN HAVE ANOTHER COMMISSIONER MAKE A MOTION. WELL, UM, HOWEVER YOU FEEL FIT, MR. CHAIR. I, I MEAN, I'M GONNA JUST SAY THAT I, THE APPLICANT PRESENTED A CERTAIN WAY THAT'S, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT, THAT I'M MAKING A MOTION TO PROVE. BUT IF THAT'S NOT [01:45:01] SUFFICIENT, DO IT HOWEVER YOU FEEL. COMMISSIONER GROUP. SO IT'S APPROVED OF ITEM ONE THROUGH THREE WITH STIPULATIONS TWO THROUGH SIX WITH THE ADDED STIPULATION TO, UM, CONSIDER OUR HIP ROOF AND THE MOVE OF THE STAIRWAY OF THE EAST PATIO TO THE SOUTH OF THE HOUSE. CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT? ONE MOMENT, SIR. OKAY. THERE BEEN MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND. ALRIGHT SIR, NOW YOU CAN ASK YOUR QUESTION. I'M SORRY. GOING BACK TO THE STAIRS AGAIN, THIS MAY NOT BE A BIG ISSUE, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER ELEVATIONS, OUR MAIN ELECTRICAL PANELS ARE ON THE HOUSE RIGHT THERE, . PERFECT. UM, IT WAS NOT A QUESTION, IT WAS A CONSIDERATION. YEAH. THAT COULD BE THE REASON FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF NOT PUTTING IT THERE. SO IT STILL, THE MOTION WAS STAMPED. OKAY, THAT'S FINE. AND, AND JUST TO ECHO THAT, THAT MIGHT, IT'S VERY VALID AND IT WAS JUST MORE LIKE A, A WAY OF SURE MINIMIZING THE VISUAL OF THE BIG, BUT WE'RE STILL ALLOWING IT TO FOUR 14 FEET AND THE ROOF IS ALSO JUST A CONSIDERATION. I ACTUALLY DO FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT ROOF FORM FOR THIS, UH, PATIO. BUT AGAIN, UM, I'LL REFER TO MY OTHER FOR THAT. SO IT WAS JUST, IT'S JUST A CONSIDERATION. YEAH. OKAY. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. OTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? CASTILLO? AYE. S AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE GROUP. AYE. ANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND GIBBS. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME TODAY, BUT 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.