[00:00:02]
AND I WAS THERE YESTERDAY AND I SAID, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.
[3:00 PM – Call to Order]
TIME IS NOW 3 P.M. AND I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER FOR WEDNESDAY, JULY 16TH, 2020 2025. MEMBER ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MA'AM.IVAN. SAVINO HERE. VELAZQUEZ. HERE. GALLOWAY.
HERE. MAZURKA. HERE. GUEVARA. GROUP. HERE. CERVANTES.
HERE. HOLLAND HERE. FETZER HERE. AND GIBBS HERE.
WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. WE HAVE TRANSLATION SERVICES, PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON. SI. BUENAS TARDES. CUALQUIER PERSONA.
NECESITA SERVICIOS DE TRADUCTION FAVOR DE PASAR LE CABINET POR SU EQUIPO.
I AM J 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 AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS, FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY AND THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY, AND FOR DEMOLITIONS, AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THE COMMISSION SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL, AND 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 FOR OR OPPOSED TO A CASE WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES EACH.
SPEAKERS MAY ALSO SIGN UP TO YIELD THEIR TWO MINUTES TO ANOTHER SPEAKER WHO HAS SIGNED UP.
ANYONE WHO IS YIELDING THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AT THE TIME THE SPEAKER IS CALLED UPON.
SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE SIGNED UP.
APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF ANY TYPE OF PERMITS.
NO WORK OF ANY TYPE IS RESTARTED 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. CHAIRMAN.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM HP STAFF, BUT I'LL ASK IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ACTION ON MEETING MINUTES FROM THE JULY 2ND DRC HEARING. THANK YOU. KEVIN. MOTION. MR.. CHAIR, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 2ND MEETING.
SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MEMBER. ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
MAMAN. AYE. SAVINO. AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY.
AYE. MAZURKA AYE. GROUP II CERVANTES. YES. HOLLAND AYE.
FETZER. AYE AND GIBBS A MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOU ALL COULD DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY IN-PERSON SPEAKERS FOR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE DO HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL. THAT'S FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE 945 WEST, WHICH I'LL PLAY THAT NOW.
THIS IS BETTY BOUCHER SAY, CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY PRESIDENT, LOUIS ZETTER.
WE HAVE A STATEMENT FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE 945 WEST.
WE URGE THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO SUPPORTS LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THIS LOCATION.
LANDMARK DESIGNATION WILL ALLOW THE OWNER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF TAX INCENTIVES AND OTHER FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES, WHILE PRESERVING THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE.
THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL ANY ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? MR. CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM NUMBER THREE, PLEASE.
ITEM THREE. ANY OTHER ITEMS? MR. CHAIR, THERE ARE NO OTHER ITEMS. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH ALL STIPULATIONS.
ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS, EXCLUDING ITEM NUMBER THREE.
[00:05:02]
SECOND, THANK YOU. AND THEN PROPERLY SECOND. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MA'AM? HI, SABINA. HI, VELASQUEZ. HI, GALLOWAY. HI, MASIKA.HI, GROUP. HI, CERVANTES. YES, HOLLEN. HI, FETZER.
HI. AND. GIBBS. HI. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU. IF YOU'RE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS 945 WEST, WE SACHSE 3903 NORTH SAINT MARY'S, 4504 SOUTH NEW BRAUNFELS, 11 ZERO 30 RUIDOSO, ONE 24TH MAY 430 EAST COMMERCE, 1401 DENVER AND 305 DORA.
YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CASE MANAGER OR A MEMBER OF STAFF, YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN TEN DAYS.
THE APPLICANT FOR 123. ITEM NUMBER THREE IS JAMES MCKNIGHT.
AND SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THE APPLICANT CAN ANSWER THOSE FOR YOU.
THANK YOU. PLEASE STEP UP TO THE PODIUM. GOOD AFTERNOON.
JAMES MCKNIGHT. 112. SPOKEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
YEAH. THANK YOU FOR STICKING AROUND. AND I ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR TEAM FOR JOINING US IN A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE SESSION, WHICH WAS REALLY HELPFUL IN PROVIDING ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND DRAWINGS FOR THIS PROJECT.
MY QUESTION IS MORE FOR STAFF. THIS IS A VERY UNUSUAL PROJECT.
YEAH, RIGHT. VERY, VERY UNUSUAL. NOT ONLY IN USE.
TYPOLOGY. WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF OBSERVATION WHEELS IN TOWN.
BUT IT'S ALSO IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE THE PARCEL IS VERY MARGINAL AND UNIQUE.
SO MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS IN YOUR REVIEW, YOU RECOMMEND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL? BECAUSE YOU SUGGEST THAT THE, LET'S SAY, OBSERVATION WHEEL STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED OBSERVATION WHEEL TO BE APPROPRIATE BASED ON OUR HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT IT IS IN.
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW THE OBSERVATION WHEEL IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS PARTICULAR SETTING.
SURE THING. THIS IS THE SAINT PAUL SQUARE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IT'S ALSO DOWNTOWN ZONING OVERLAY, WHICH ENCOMPASSES A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES.
USES AND UNDERLYING ZONING. SO IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDE AND DOWNTOWN OVERLAY, STAFF FINDS THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE. OBVIOUSLY THE DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDE, NOR THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES.
THEY DON'T GIVE DESIGN CRITERIA FOR AN OBSERVATION WHEEL.
MATERIALS, ARCHITECTURAL FORMS, DESIGN INTENT LIGHTING, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING.
THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT OUR DESIGN HEAVILY FOCUSED ON.
BUT GENERALLY THERE'S EXISTING HEIGHT IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IN THIS PRESENTATION, BUT THE APPLICANT IN THEIR CASE FILE APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDED A HEIGHT DIAGRAM THAT SHOWED THIS IN RELATIONSHIP TO ALAMODOME. HERE IT IS. TOWER OF THE AMERICAS.
OKAY. SO WOULD YOU SAY THAT IN THIS WOULD BE A UNIQUE SITUATION OR CAN I FROM MY HISTORIC DISTRICT SITE EXAMPLES ON THE OTHER SIDE, OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT, I MEAN THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE EXAMPLES OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT.
WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE FIND THAT THERE IS RELATABLE HEIGHT IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY.
WE ALSO FIND THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD FOCUS ON HOW TO RELATE STREET LEVEL ELEMENTS, THE THE OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS, THE AUXILIARY BUILDINGS, THE, THE I THINK THERE'S A DINING HALL THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
THOSE SHOULD BE RELATABLE IN MATERIAL, TEXTURE, PROFILE AND FORM TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS.
[00:10:06]
SO THOSE ARE THINGS WE WOULD LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING FURTHER DEVELOPED.I JUST I HAD A COUPLE OF NEIGHBORS FROM ONE OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS ASKING ME HOW THIS COULD BE, AND I WANTED TO HEAR IT STRAIGHT FROM YOU GUYS.
THAT'S THE EXTENT OF MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION. DO YOU AGREE WITH ALL THE STAFF STIPULATIONS? WE DO. WE AGREE TO ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT A LARGE PART OF THIS IS GOING TO BE THE DETAILING.
AND BECAUSE THIS IS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, WE'RE JUST NOT THERE YET. SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS THE LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING, MATERIALITY, ALL THAT'S GOING TO BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME FOR FINAL.
SO THERE'S DEFINITELY ANOTHER BIG BITE AT THIS APPLE.
AND WILL BE, YOU KNOW, PARTICIPATING WITH STAFF ALONG AND DRC ALONG THE WAY.
MISTER CHAIR. MAKE A MOTION TO. OKAY. YES, SIR.
MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONCEPTUAL WITH ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS.
SECOND, SPEND MORE THAN PROPERLY. SECOND, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MISTER CHAIR, I JUST WANT TO ADD YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE AT THE PROJECT PUTTING PUTTING ON.
WHAT WOULD I DO? THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER PLACES THAT I WOULD THINK THIS WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE IN THE, IN THE VICINITY, BUT THE ONE THING THAT STANDS OUT TO ME IS THAT THIS IS NOT ALIEN IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.
IT IT, IN FACT, KIND OF PULLS US BACK TO THE ERA OF THE HEMISPHERE AND, AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT THAT USED TO BE PART OF THAT LANDSCAPE THAT PERHAPS ARE FINDING THEIR WAY BACK INTO A MORE VIBRANT AND PLAYFUL AND FUN AND NOT JUST A PLACE FOR TOURISTS, BUT A PLACE WHERE THE LOCALS FIND INTEREST IN AS WELL.
SO IT'S A IT'S A, IT'S A FUN WAY TO LOOK AT SAN ANTONIO, BUT IT'S.
THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MA'AM? A SAVINO, A VELAZQUEZ, A GALLOWAY, A BAZOOKA, A GROUP, A CERVANTES. YES, HOLLAND, A FETZER, A AND GIBBS A MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU. CAN HAVE ITEM NUMBER TEN, PLEASE. ITEM NUMBER TEN.
[INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION]
DRC CASE NUMBER 2025 1751 20. CALLAHAN. THE FIRST ITEM OF THIS REQUEST IS THE CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL AND APPROVAL OF A WAIVER TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 35 608, TO ACCEPT AND REVIEW THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE REQUEST NOTED BELOW IN ITEM TWO.ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON THE VACANT LOT AT 120 CALLAHAN.
THIS SLOT IS TO BE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE LAVACA HISTORIC DISTRICT.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF REQUEST ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE APPROVAL OF A WAIVER TO ACCEPT AND REVIEW A SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION UNDER THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 35 608, BASED ON FINDINGS D AND E.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STORY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDINGS H THROUGH Y, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. WITH COMMISSIONERS LIKE ME TO READ EACH STIPULATION INTO THE RECORD.
NO. OKAY. I WILL NOTE THE APPLICANT IS HERE IN PERSON.
I WILL ALSO NOTE, AND I'LL LET THE APPLICANT CONFIRM, THAT SINCE THE POSTING OF THIS AGENDA, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO EACH OF THE STIPULATIONS OF STAFFS.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, HE CAN ANSWER OR ADDRESS THOSE.
OTHERWISE THE APPLICANT IS NOTED VIA EMAIL THAT HE'S AGREED WITH STIPULATIONS.
DANIEL. HI, GUYS. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME AGAIN.
AND ALSO, I JUST WANT TO START OFF BY THANKING SIR, BEFORE YOU START OFF, INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
MY NAME IS DANIEL CRUZ, AND I'M WITH DESIGN GROUP, AND I'M REPRESENTING OUR CLIENT FOR 120.
CALLAHAN. THANK YOU. SORRY. SO I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE FOR THE THE STAFF MEMBERS THAT ARE ON STAFF AND AS WELL AS COMMISSIONERS THAT DID SIT ON THE DRC. AND AFTER OUR LAST HEARING WE DID GET SOME INTERESTING FEEDBACK.
WITH THE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A VOICEMAIL FOR THIS? THERE IS A VOICEMAIL, AND I DO WANT TO NOTE COMMISSIONERS, THAT ACTION DOES NEED TO BE TAKEN ON ITEM NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS THE CONSIDERATION OF THE WAIVER.
[00:15:01]
JUST TO TO NOTE THAT I WILL PLAY THE VOICEMAIL NOW.THIS IS BETTY BOUCHER CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO.
THE PRESIDENT LEWIS BETTER. OUR STATEMENT IS THAT THE SOCIETY SUPPORTS THE STAFF STIPULATIONS REGARDING THE PROPOSED DESIGN OF ITEM NUMBER TEN AT 120. CALLAHAN. BUT WE DO NOT SUPPORT THE REQUEST FOR A WAIVER.
AS SEVERAL OF THE MOST PROBLEMATIC PARTS OF THE DESIGN HAVE NOT CHANGED, THE FRONT LOADING GARAGE, WHILE RELABELED STORAGE, STILL ILLUSTRATES THE PARKING PATTERN FOREIGN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
NO APPROPRIATE PARKING PLAN HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AS REQUESTED.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. ITEM NUMBER ONE. WHAT'S YOUR MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE THE WAIVER. BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS AND THE PRESENTATION.
SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVING PROPERLY. SECOND DISCUSSION.
MISTER CHAIR, I WOULD SUPPORT THE MOTION TO FURTHER THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE REMAINING PART OF THE PROJECT AND THE STIPULATIONS. THANK YOU. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM NUMBER ONE? THE WAIVER. I HAVE A QUESTION, SIR. SO MY QUESTION CONCERNING THE WAIVER.
SO STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THE WAIVER.
HOWEVER, MY MY QUESTION IS STEMMED FROM. WE SAW THIS IN APRIL.
I KNOW YOU WENT THROUGH THE DRC. I LIKE TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, FROM YOUR SITE, FROM YOUR EYES, WHAT HAS SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED. IN THIS, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU FEEL AS THOUGH THAT A WAIVER NEEDS OR SHOULD BE GRANTED.
WE ARE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES AND HAS DOCUMENTED THAT PREVIOUS STIPULATION HAS BEEN REMOVED.
THE GARAGE COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT HAS ALSO BEEN REMOVED.
PLUS, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL DOCUMENT THAT SHOWCASES THAT AS WELL.
THERE WAS ALSO SOME ROOF SHAPES FROM A TRADITIONAL GABLE TO A HIP TO REDUCE THE OVERALL HEIGHT IN THE ESTHETIC FROM FROM AN APPEARANCE FROM AN EXTERIOR AND STANDPOINT. SO WE ALSO WE ALSO REMOVED REDUCE THE OVERALL LOT COVERAGE.
THERE IS A PORTION OF THE, OF THE TOP OF THE BUILDING THAT WAS ALSO CUT DOWN.
SO THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE HAS ALSO BEEN REDUCED.
IN THAT REGARD. SO YES, THERE ARE A LOT OF SIMILAR CHARACTERS FROM THE PREVIOUS DESIGN, BUT I DID HEAR A LOT OF THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN THE PREVIOUS HEARING, AND WE DID ADDRESS THEM.
I FELT APPROPRIATELY TO BE BACK HERE FOR A BIT A SECOND TIME, IF YOU WILL.
THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. CHAIR? YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO READDRESS MY MY EARLIER COMMENT.
I DON'T KNOW IF MY QUESTION IS GOING TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS STAGE HERE, BUT IF YOU WERE TO BE GRANTED THE WAIVER YOU'RE ACCEPTING ALL OF THE STIPULATIONS FROM STAFF.
CORRECT. AND STAFF, WOULD THAT MEAN THAT THIS PROJECT OR ANY CHANGES, ANY OF THOSE OTHER CHANGES WOULD COME BACK TO US? OR DOES IT GO BACK TO YOU TO APPROVE BEFORE ISSUING A COA? IT WOULD COME BACK TO STAFF TO APPROVE BEFORE ISSUING THE COA.
THEN WE WOULD TAKE THAT TO A SUBCOMMITTEE AND IF NEED BE.
COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR CLARIFICATION. BUT IT WOULD IT WOULD COME TO STAFF. OKAY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT.
SO WE HAVE ROLL CALL, PLEASE, ON ITEM ONE. MAMAN I SAVINO.
[00:20:02]
I VELAZQUEZ I GALLOWAY I MAZURKA I, GROUP II CERVANTES. NO. HOLLEN A, FETZER A AND GIBBS A MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM TWO WITH ALL STAFF.I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS I HAVE QUESTIONS. OKAY.
WOULDN'T THAT HAPPEN AFTER THE. NO QUESTIONS COME FIRST.
SO GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER AND THEN COMMISSIONER.
SAVINO. SORRY. YEAH. SO NOW THAT THE WAIVER HAS BEEN RIGHT, WE JUST GO TO QUESTIONS ON THIS.
THIS. WHAT'S PROPOSED TODAY? WHERE'S THE CURRENT DRIVE CUT.
IT IS SHOWCASED IN THAT DASH LINE. ON THE SITE PLAN.
SO YOU HAVE THE DASHED LINE ON THE FAR LEFT. WE HAVE AGREED.
WE DID HAVE A SITE MEETING WITH OUR CLIENT. IT IS LITERALLY RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
CURRENTLY. WELL, I GUESS TECHNICALLY NOT, BECAUSE PROPERTY LINE DOESN'T TAKE OVER THAT FAR, BUT IT WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE PROPERTY LINE.
OUR CLIENTS HAVE AGREED TO GO AHEAD AND KEEP THAT.
AND WE MET ON SITE TO HAVE A, YOU KNOW, SITE SITE MEETING IN REGARDS TO THIS.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE FRONT FACADE FOR THE ADDITION, FOR THE FOR THE ACCESS TO THE EQUIPMENT OR TO THE, WHAT DO THEY CALL THEM, BIKES AND SCOOTERS AND MISCELLANEOUS WORKOUT EQUIPMENT THEY HAVE.
OR WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO A DOOR THAT'S MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE TRANSPARENT WITH SOME WINDOW FEATURES? SO IT LOOKS LIKE A WINDOW. WE COULD EXPLORE THAT.
I THINK SIDE DOOR. YEAH. WE COULD EXPLORE THAT ON THE, ON THE SIDE IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
WELL, I THINK BECAUSE IF WE PUT IT ON THE FRONT FACADE, I THINK WE CAN DISCUSS THAT AFTER.
YEAH. BUT I THINK THAT WAS MY QUESTIONS AS OF NOW.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SAVINO. MY QUESTIONS WERE RIGHT IN THAT SAME AREA, ESPECIALLY WITH THE GARAGE DOOR, BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE A GARAGE DOOR, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT'S BEING USED.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD PICK UP THAT DISCUSSION IN IN EARNEST AFTER THE VOTE.
THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MOTION TO APPROVE WITH ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS ON ITEM NUMBER TWO.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN PROPERLY.
SECOND. DISCUSSION. MISTER CHAIR. OKAY, MA'AM.
YEAH. AND AND I MIGHT JUST THROW IN AN AMENDED MOTION, BUT.
OKAY, LET'S SO ON THAT BECAUSE ELIMINATING THAT KIND OF, LIKE, LOOK LIKE YOU'RE DOING A FRONT PARKING, RIGHT, SO A SIDE DOOR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND THEN HOW ARE YOU GOING TO CHANGE THE ROOF FORM OF THE SECOND LEVEL PATIO.
SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE SHOWING A KIND OF AN OPEN PERGOLA TYPE ROOF, IF YOU WILL.
WE WOULD JUST INTEGRATE IT WITH THE THE EXISTING ROOF LINE.
THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR TO SOME OF THE HISTORIC I MEAN, BECAUSE WE CAN PUT AN ACTUAL ROOF WITH A METAL METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF AS WELL, KIND OF MIMIC SOME OF THE OTHER HISTORIC PROFILES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. CONTINUOUS. OKAY.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM IS THE WHOLE WALL, LIKE, ALSO LIKE THE ARCH OVER THAT WALL THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY FENESTRATION OR ANYTHING ALONG THE DRIVEWAY. THAT'S KIND OF THE ISSUE.
CAN I DO AN AMENDED MOTION? MAYBE. LET ME JUST TRY AND SEE.
I'M JUST I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND TO CONCEPTUALLY APPROVE ITEM NUMBER TWO WITH THAT STIPULATIONS.
MISTER CHAIR, SHOULDN'T ALL OF THE QUESTIONS BE THE AMENDED MOTION IN THE MIDDLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS? SO IF YOU HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS. SO OKAY, HOLD YOUR MOTION.
SO IF YOU WANT TO HAVE I DO. YES. I JUST WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO THAT TOPIC.
THE IDEA OF A CONCEPTUAL, APPROVAL CAN ALLOW A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO ADDRESS THIS, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S NOT ONLY THE DOOR, IT IS THE SLAB HEIGHT. AND I UNDERSTAND IF YOU HAVE THINGS THAT ARE GOING INTO THE PLACE, INTO THAT ROOM.
FOR THE SLAB HEIGHT WAS A REQUEST BY STAFF TO RAISE THE SLAB HEIGHT OVER THE STORAGE, OVER OR OVER THE ENTIRE THE ENTIRE THING FOR THE STORAGE AREA. WE COULD RAISE THAT TO BE THE SAME LEVEL AS THE AS THE EXISTING SLIDE.
SO WE NEED TO DISCUSS HOW THAT WOULD HAPPEN. AND THEN THE OPTIONS FOR ANY KIND OF OPENING.
[00:25:02]
IS IT A DOOR. IS IT A WINDOW. YOU KNOW. DOES IT LOOK LIKE SPANDREL GLASS WHERE YOU CAN MATCH THE GLASS? THERE ARE A LOT OF OPTIONS, BUT STILL HAVE THAT A FOUR FOOT OPENING.THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER OPTIONS THAT NEED TO BE EXPLORED, BUT NOT HERE IN A LATER IN A DRC.
MR. CHAIR, I HAVE COMMENTS, SIR. MR.. MR. CHAIR, WITH RESPECT TO THE THE.
THE REQUEST FOR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION IN IN WHAT WOULD BE A LARGER, I GUESS, CONCEALED WALL. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE THE ZOO PROJECT THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT THE LITTLE WINDOWS, THERE ARE MANY WAYS, I THINK WITH STAFF THAT THIS APPLICANT CAN, CAN DISCOVER AND AGREE ON A FENESTRATION THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE HERE. IT'S JUST CONSIDERING THAT IT'S NOT OUR PURVIEW.
IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT WALL, ONLY WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
AND AND NOT EVEN NECESSARILY WHETHER WE LIKE IT, BUT WHETHER OR NOT IT MEETS THE GUIDELINE.
BUT I THINK MONUMENTAL TO OUR TASK IS THAT PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO THE TO THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE PERGOLA THAT THAT IT COULD TAKE A ROOF AND THEN THE ROOF STARTS TO BE LIKE OTHER HOUSES IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE APPROPRIATE TO THE TIME PERIOD.
I THINK THOSE KIND OF CONVERSATIONS ARE VERY GOOD BECAUSE THEY, THEY ALSO EXPOSE THE LINE BETWEEN FALSE HISTORICISM AND THE THING IN ITSELF IN ITS TIME FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINES.
BUT IT IT HAS GOTTEN TO A POINT WHERE AT THIS POINT IT MEETS US.
AND THEN ON THE OTHER LEVEL, IT'S VERY CLEARLY NOT OUR DESIGN.
AND IF THERE'S A TWEAKING HERE OR THERE, THAT THAT TWEAKING CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH STAFF AND THEIR EXPERTISE, MUCH LIKE IN THE PREVIOUS PROJECT, AND THAT THIS PROJECT CAN THEN GO OFF AND BECOME A REAL PROJECT WHILE WE TAKE ON THE NEXT. BUT AT THIS POINT, WE'RE MICROMANAGING, AND IT DOESN'T SEEM APPROPRIATE THAT WE TRY TO MAKE THESE PROJECTS OURS.
THEY'RE NOT OURS. THEY'RE THEY'RE THE DESIGNERS.
THANK YOU, SIR. MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
GO, SIR. FOR STAFF. WHAT? WHAT ARE THE FENESTRATION GUIDELINES AS IT RELATES TO A LARGE YOU KNOW, IF IF THAT IF THAT GARAGE DOOR IS REMOVED AND IT'S IT'S A LARGE FACADE WITH NO FENESTRATION, IS THAT WITHIN OR WITHOUT THE GUIDELINES OR. I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE SOMETHING THAT WOULD KICK IN THAT WOULD SAY THAT, THAT THE OFFICE OPE WOULD SAY, WELL, YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING THERE.
WELL, I THINK THAT WE WOULD IN A NORMAL SITUATION, IT WOULD BE ATYPICAL FOR THAT FACADE TO BE BLANK.
THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT STAFF COULD FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE STANDPOINT, IF THE APPLICANT CAME TO US AND HAD FENESTRATION THAT WAS COMPARABLE OR SIMILAR IN SIZE OR PROFILE TO WHAT'S FOUND. YOU KNOW, FURTHER TO THE LEFT ON THE FACADE OR I GUESS OUR RIGHT OR UP ABOVE THAT WAS HERE.
THE APPLICANT CAME BACK TO THAT, TO US WITH THAT.
I GENERALLY THINK THE OTHER THINGS ARE AT THE LEVEL WHERE STAFF COULD REVIEW THEM.
AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE FIND IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH ONE OF OUR STIPULATIONS OR WASN'T CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF A STIPULATION, WE CAN WORK ON THAT WITH THE APPLICANT. IF WE NEED TO GO BACK TO SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEW WITH THE 1 OR 2 ITEMS, WE CAN DO THAT. AS FAR AS THE THE SECOND LEVEL PERGOLA.
THAT'S REFLECTIVE OF WHAT'S FOUND HISTORICALLY, BUT THEN STILL MATCHES THE CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS OR PROFILES THAT ARE FOUND ELSEWHERE ON THIS AND HAVE IT TO THE POINT WHERE HE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO GET A PERMIT.
[00:30:06]
COMMISSION'S APPROVAL AND STIPULATIONS. THANK YOU FOR THAT.MY MY SENSE IS JUST THE, THE THE COMMISSION. AND I GUESS I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE COMMISSION THAT THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF COMMISSIONERS THAT MAYBE WANT TO SEE, WANT TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S SOME SORT OF FENESTRATION PATTERN RIGHT THERE AND THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE A BLANK WALL. AND REALLY IT'S NUTS AND BOLTS CONVERSATION AS WELL WITH WITH APPROVAL. ARE WE GOING TO END UP IS THERE A CHANCE THAT THERE'S A BLANK WALL THERE, OR OR IS THERE GOING TO END UP BEING SOME SORT OF FENESTRATION PATTERN? I THINK THE COMMISSION COULD INCLUDE A MOTION THAT SAYS FENESTRATION THAT'S COMPARABLE TO THAT, WHICH IS ALL HIGHLIGHTED HERE, IS INCORPORATED OR UP ABOVE IS INCORPORATED.
AND THEN STAFF COULD FOLLOW UP WITH THE APPLICANT TO ENSURE THAT THAT WAS DONE.
WELL, MR. CHAIR, I'D BE I COULD AMEND MY MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THE BLANK PORTION OF THE FRONT FACADE TO RECEIVE SOME FORM OF, OF OF FENESTRATION OR RHYTHMIC DETAIL ELEMENTS THAT PRODUCE I DON'T WANT TO SAY ESTHETIC BECAUSE THAT WOULD ALMOST BE OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW, A A PATTERN THAT, THAT SATISFIES STAFF'S OBLIGATIONS. IF NOT, THAT STAFF WOULD HAVE THE, THE THE RIGHT TO, TO BRING THAT BACK TO THE COMMISSION.
SO SPECIFICALLY FOR APPROVAL OF COMMISSIONER ACCEPTABLE FENESTRATION.
YES, SIR. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO SIMPLIFY THAT, PLEASE.
IS THIS SIMPLE? YOU MODIFYING YOUR MOTION OR AMENDING YOUR MOTION.
SO THIS MODIFIED GIVE A SIMPLE LANGUAGE I GOT YOU OKAY.
SO YEAH BECAUSE I'M THINKING THROUGH IT. SO THAT AMEND MY MOTION TO TO HAVE APPLICANT EXPLORE OPTIONS FOR FENESTRATION PATTERNS TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF AND AND THE END OF MOTION.
CAN YOU SPECIFY THAT THIS IS FOR STIPULATION NUMBER FIVE? YES, MA'AM. FOR STIPULATION NUMBER FIVE. AND MR. CHAIR, OH, WAIT A SECOND. WE NEED A SECOND FOR THE MOTION.
SECOND. SECOND, MA'AM? YEAH, MY. ON THE SECOND, I WOULD.
I WANTED TO SPECIFY THAT. NOT THAT THEY WILL EXPLORE THAT.
THAT SOMETHING WILL GO THERE. YES, BUT THAT'S WHY I ADDED THE STAFF.
BECAUSE STAFF THEN IS OBLIGATED BECAUSE IT SAID OBLIGATED STAFF IS OBLIGATED TO.
SO IT'S NOT ONLY FENESTRATION, IT'S REALLY ALSO HAVING A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES ALL THE WAY UP THERE.
CORRECT? I MEAN YEAH, SO SO I'LL PULL UP THE SITE PLAN.
SO OUR PRIMARY COMMENT IN REGARDS TO THAT IN THE DRIVEWAY NOT SHIFTING WAS BECAUSE THE DRIVEWAY SHIFTING WAS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE APPLICANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE PARKING IN AN INTERNAL GARAGE, AS WAS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNED.
AT THIS POINT THERE'S AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY ON SITE.
THE APPLICANT APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO INCORPORATE LANDSCAPING TO DOUBLE AS A PARKING ELEMENT.
WHICH HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE SEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.
SO IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS OR TALK ABOUT, OR IF YOU FIND THAT IT SHOULD BE A DEFINED SIDEWALK, THEN OR, EXCUSE ME, A DEFINED DRIVEWAY THEN THEN PLEASE DISCUSS OR DIRECT STAFF OF WHAT YOU FIND TO BE.
SO THE REASON WHY I DID THE AMENDED MOTION AND CONCEPTUAL WAS BECAUSE, I MEAN, AS TO COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ POINT, IN MANY CASES WE'VE SAID IT TO STAFF, BUT SINCE THIS IS A WAIVER CASE AND WE'VE REQUESTED A WAIVER, I THINK WE HAVE TO JUST TREAT IT A LITTLE BIT MORE CAREFULLY BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN THROUGH MANY TIMES.
AND AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY IT'S JUST LIKE, OKAY, WELL JUST LET STAFF DECIDE.
THAT IS THE REASON WHY I DID THAT CONCEPTUAL AMENDMENT.
AND NOW I KIND OF AGREE WITH THE AMENDED MOTION, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S CLEAR ENOUGH.
AND I'M A LITTLE BIT WORRIED ABOUT THIS WHOLE FRONT YARD PARKING OF WHAT IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.
AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE APPLICANT COULD COME BACK WITH ALL THE EDITED DESIGN DRAWINGS, WITH ALL THE STIPULATIONS, AND REALLY BE ON A CONSENT AGENDA.
[00:35:04]
LIKE WITH ALL THOSE STIPULATIONS MET? COMMISSIONER FETZER IS ONLINE COMMISSIONER.YES, SIR. YES. I'M INCLINED TO AGREE WITH A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. IT'S NOT JUST THE FRONT FACADE THAT WHERE THE GARAGE DOORS ARE BEING ELIMINATED, BUT THERE'S OTHER FACADES ON THE BUILDING THAT I THINK FENESTRATION SHOULD BE EXPLORED.
THE SIDE ELEVATIONS HAVE SOME LARGE BLANK WALLS AS WELL.
AND SO I WOULD THAT'S WHY I WOULD SUPPORT THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER. GO AHEAD PLEASE.
I'D LIKE TO PUT IN AN AMENDED MOTION. CONCEPTUALLY APPROVED WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? SPEND MORE THAN PROPERLY.
SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? YOU FIRST HAVE TO APPROVE THE.
NO, WE'RE GOING TO WE, MR. CHAIR. YOU'RE IN DISCUSSION, RIGHT? NO, WE'RE GOING TO. SO WE'RE BOTH AT HOME. ONE MOMENT PLEASE.
I NEED SOME HELP FROM LEGAL. SO. SO ARE WE. ARE WE VOTING NOW ON THE AMENDED MOTION, OR DO WE STILL HAVE DISCUSSION ON THIS? THERE'S 300. DO YOU. DO YOU VOTE? YOU VOTE ON THE LAST AMENDMENT MOTION FIRST. THERE'S THREE MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR.
THE FIRST ONE IS WAS THE ORIGINAL MOTION. AND THEN THERE WAS AN AMENDED.
AND I BELIEVE IT'S A MODIFICATION RELATED TO THE AMENDED MOTION.
SO THEN WE REALLY JUST HAVE TWO MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR.
YOU VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT FIRST? YES. AND THERE'S DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT.
HAVE A DISCUSSION. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. OKAY.
ON THE ON THE AMENDED MOTION. YES, SIR. YES, SIR.
EXACTLY. YES, SIR. GO AHEAD. SIR. MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M NOT GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. I, I THINK THAT WE'RE WE'RE ENGAGING IN ACTIVITY THAT ALTERS THE ORGANIC NATURE OF THE ARTISTIC, THE ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION OF TODAY, WHICH IS CLEARLY DIFFERENT THAN THE ARTISTIC ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION OF YESTERDAY. A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THE POST-MODERNIST PERIOD, WHERE IT WAS A VERY CLEARLY ACCEPTED PRINCIPLE WORLDWIDE, THAT OLD ARCHITECTURE WAS BEING ABSTRACTED AND THAT THAT ABSTRACTION WAS.
RESPONDING TO CHANGE OF MATERIALITY. CHANGE OF SKILL.
BUDGET DIFFERENCES. MANY DIFFERENT FORCES. IN THIS, IT SEEMS THAT THAT ONCE IT'S GONE THROUGH A PROCESS OF DRC, THE DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE. THERE'S SOME FINE TWEAKS THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT IF IT WAS MINE THAT THAT I COULD DO RIGHT HERE.
GIVE YOU A SKETCH AND SHOW IT TO YOU. BUT IT'S NOT MINE.
AND AND AND I DO FEEL WITH THIS APPLICANT, THERE'S BEEN HERE MANY TIMES FOR MANY DIFFERENT PROJECTS.
A LEVEL OF, OF, OF TRUST THAT, THAT THIS IS REFLECTING NOT ONLY THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE INSIDE OF IT, BUT THE PEOPLE THAT LOOKED AT IT AND EXPLORED IT AND THAT THEY'RE PRESENTING TO THE CITIZENS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, TO THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY, AN ASPECT OF OF WHAT IS OCCURRING IN OUR TIME AND PLACE THAT 100 YEARS FROM NOW, SOMEONE WILL BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT AND TELL YOU WHAT YEAR IT WAS BUILT.
WE'RE INTERFERING IN THAT PROCESS, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE DRC TO TO INTERFERE IN THE ORGANIC NATURE OF THE SPACE OF THE DESIGNER OF TODAY. THANK YOU SIR.
THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, I JUST HAVE A QUICK COMMENT TO THAT.
AND I THINK I'M KIND OF AGREEING WITH ALMOST ALL OF MY COMMISSIONERS HERE.
THEY EACH HAVE GIVEN THEIR LITTLE PIECE. THE CHALLENGE FOR YOU FROM A DESIGN STANDPOINT, IS TO GET THAT ROOM THAT YOU WANT THERE AND DESIGN IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT DOESN'T STAND OUT OR POP FROM THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT MATCHES THE OTHER FENESTRATION ON THE FRONT FACADE.
RIGHT. SO THAT MEANS NO BARN DOOR LOOKING THING, NO GARAGE DOOR, YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF THING.
[00:40:01]
YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO SAY LOOK LIKE A WINDOW, BUT YOU KIND OF GET IT TO MATCH THE OTHER FENESTRATION IN THERE. SO YOU HAVE YOUR WORK CUT OUT FOR YOU. THEN YOU'VE GOT THE FENESTRATION ON THE SIDE. SO YOU KNOW HOW YOU SKIN THAT CAT IS UP TO YOU, BUT YOU JUST GOT TO GET IT TO FALL IN PLACE.GOTCHA. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. I SEE YOUR HAND RAISED.
IS THAT FROM BEFORE? ARE YOU SURE YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? OH, NO MORE QUESTIONS. SORRY. NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. CAN I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? ON THE AMENDED MOTION. MAMAN.
COMMISSIONER. MAMAN! I'M HERE. YES. THANK YOU.
SAVINO. YEAH. I VELASQUEZ. NATE. GALLOWAY. HI, MASIKA.
I GROUP I CERVANTES. YES. HOLLAND. HI.
FETZER. AYE. AND GIBBS, A MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU GUYS. ITEM NUMBER 11, PLEASE.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11 HDR. SEE CASE NUMBER 2020 5-1588 38 EAST MAGNOLIA AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE.
CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 605 SQUARE FOOT, ONE STOREY REAR ADDITION.
TO MODIFY THE EXISTING FENESTRATION PATTERN BY INFILLING ONE FRONT DOOR OPENING.
THE RE REPLACING ALL SIX EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS ON SITE WITH ONE OVER ONE ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
ITEM ONE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL THE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 605 SQUARE FOOT, ONE STOREY REAR ADDITION BASED ON THE FINDINGS, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS ONE.
THAT THE APPLICANT STORE 105 WOOD SIDING OR LAPPED FIBER CEMENT SIDING WITH A SMOOTH FINISH AND A REVEAL TO MATCH THE HISTORIC SIDING ON SITE TO INCLUDE ANY OFFSET OR A VERTICAL TRIM PIECE TO DISTINGUISH THE ADDITION FROM THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
FOR THAT, THE APPLICANT PROVIDE UPDATED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS TO AHP STAFF REVIEW PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT MEET ALL SETBACK STANDARDS AS REQUIRED BY CITY ZONING AND OBTAIN A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, IF APPLICABLE. ITEM TWO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THE STREET FACING FRONT DOOR MODIFICATION BASED ON THE FINDINGS WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS ONE.
TO THAT, THE APPLICANT REPLICATE THE EXISTING GAINED WINDOW CONFIGURATION LOCATED ON SITE TO INCLUDE TRIM AND MULLION THREE THAT THE STAFF PROVIDE, OR THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE UPDATED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS TO OSB STAFF REVIEW PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND ITEM THREE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND WHOLESALE WOOD WINDOW REPLACEMENT BASED ON THE FINDINGS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT RETAIN THE HISTORIC WOOD WINDOWS ON SITE AND REPAIR IN KIND.
THERE WAS AN ON SITE DRC WITH COMMISSIONERS MONICA SAVINO AND JEFFREY FETZER.
THANK YOU. YOU CAN GO AHEAD. IVAN. IVAN SOLIS FOR 838 EAST MAGNOLIA.
THANK YOU. SIR, PLEASE PRESENT YOUR CASE. SO WE'RE LOOKING TO ADD THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THE REAR OF THE HOUSE. WE DO AGREE TO BRING THE GABLE ROOF DOWN TO A HIP TO MATCH THE EXISTING ROOF LINE. WE ARE ALSO IN AGREEMENTS WITH DELETING THE DOOR AND PUTTING THE WINDOW IN PLACE. AND WE WILL REFINISH THE EXISTING WINDOWS.
IS THAT IT, SIR? WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SIGN.
THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THE 105 SIDING.
THE ONLY THING THAT WE DO REQUEST IS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO DEMONSTRATE A ONE BY OVER OUR EXISTING AND OUR NEW SO WE CAN HAVE A CONSISTENT RUN. WE ARE GOING BACK WITH THE EXACT SAME.
EXCUSE ME. EXACT SAME SIDING THAT WAS DISCOVERED ORIGINAL, YOU KNOW, ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE.
SO WE HAVE ALLOCATED THAT MATERIAL AND READY TO INSTALL THAT.
[00:45:04]
ONCE APPROVED. OKAY. IS THAT COMPLETES YOUR CASE, SIR? YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION, PLEASE.I HAVE SOME QUESTION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER GROUP.
SO BASICALLY, YOU'RE AGREEING TO ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS, BUT THE ONE INCH TRIM.
THAT IS CORRECT. WHICH ALSO ON ITEM THREE, THAT WOULD BE INSTEAD OF DOING A HORSE REPLACEMENT, YOU WOULD REFINISH THE WINDOWS THAT ARE EXISTING.
WE'D RATHER NOT, BUT THIS HAS BEEN A LOT TOUGHER TO DEAL WITH THAN ORIGINALLY THOUGHT.
AND WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME. AND TIME IS MONEY FOR FOR MY INVESTOR AND OR THE HOMEOWNER.
AND SO EVERY DAY THAT WE SPEND ON A STANDSTILL, IT'S COSTING US MONEY AND WE CANNOT COME BACK TO ANOTHER HEARING IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS TO SEE IF WE GET APPROVED FOR WINDOWS THAT ARE NOT REALLY FUNCTIONAL, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK REALLY HARD TO TRY TO EVEN MAKE A FEW OF THEM FUNCTIONAL.
HONESTLY. YOU WERE ON SITE, MISS SAVINO, AND YOU LOOKED AT THE WINDOWS.
THE WINDOWS ARE MORE BURDENED THAN YOU. THAN YOU CAN IMAGINE.
NOW THAT WE KNOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REFRAME THOSE WINDOWS, PUT HEADERS ON, AND BATTLE THEM OUT TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THEM BACK INTO A A 50% WORKING CONDITION ONCE THEY'RE ALL, YOU KNOW, WORKED ON AND REVAMPED OR WHATNOT.
IF BASED ON THAT ANSWER, MR. CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
I THINK WE HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. GO AHEAD MA'AM.
A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. YES. YES. I ATTENDED THE SITE VISIT.
BUT OVERALL, BASED ON THE THINGS WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST.
IT'S IN REALLY PRETTY GOOD SHAPE CONDITION, BUT THEY DO NEED ATTENTION.
I WANTED TO ASK FOR A CLARIFICATION, AND PERHAPS EVEN STAFF COULD HELP OUT WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE.
STIPULATION ONE, ITEM ONE REDUCING THE RIDGE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED ADDITION.
AND YOU SAID YOU WOULD MEET IT WITH A HIP. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE RIDGES HERE? AND YOU'RE USING A HIP TO EASE INTO THE EXISTING ROOF? NO, WE'RE GOING TO IT'S ARE YOU GOING TO LOWER.
IT'S GOING TO LOWER THE WHOLE ROOFLINE. OKAY.
OKAY. THAT WAS A AS YOU WELL KNOW, A REAL CONCERN OF MINE, AT LEAST BECAUSE OF THE VISIBILITY.
THEY'VE BEEN A CONCERN FOR ALL OF FOR THE NEIGHBORS.
STAFF WAS GOING TO DO THAT? YES. WE WEREN'T ABLE TO FIND ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTALLING NEW HEADERS AND SUCH FOR THE WINDOWS.
AGAIN, IF YOU RUN INTO ANY ISSUE WITH YOUR FRAMING INSPECTION, FEEL FREE TO INCLUDE OPI STAFF WITH THAT COMMUNICATION WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO COORDINATE A RESPONSE.
SO THE REASON WHY WE'RE AGREEING TO KEEP WINDOWS AND REFURBISH IS SO THAT WE STAY IN LINE WITH WHAT OPI AND THE COMMITTEE HAS OFFERED. BUT THE CITY IS NOT GOING TO PASS OUR FRAME INSPECTION DUE TO NOT HAVING PROPER HEADERS OVER EACH EXPOSED WALL THAT TOUCHES THE EXTERIOR OF THE OF THE HOUSE.
THAT'S THE EXTENT OF MY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. CHAIR. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
OKAY, SIR. THERE, THERE. THERE'S GOING TO BE AN INCONSISTENCY, RIGHT? WITH WITH THE WAY THAT THE GUIDELINES REQUEST REQUIRE AND CODE IS OBVIOUSLY ANOTHER ASPECT, BUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT, I THINK THAT OR IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE CONSIDER ALSO LIKE WE'RE GIVEN THE POWER TO LOOK AT DECISION MAKING THROUGH AN EQUITY LENS. AND I'VE SPENT A FEW DECADES IN PRESERVATION AND AND ANYTHING IS PRESERVED.
IF YOU'VE GOT THE MONEY. SO THEN THERE'S A COST OF BENEFIT, RIGHT.
SO SO WELL QUESTION PLEASE. YOUR BANK AND THE STATE BANK.
MAKE A QUESTION, PLEASE. THE WHAT RECOURSE DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE WITH RESPECT TO AN INCONSISTENCY THAT OUR REQUIREMENT IS OBVIOUSLY ONLY LOOKING AT THE COST OF THE WINDOW.
[00:50:05]
BUT OBVIOUSLY IF YOU HAVE TO REMOVE THE THE WALL MATERIAL, REPLACE IT, BUILD HEADERS THAT NOW IT IMPLICATES AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SET OF CRITERIA, DIFFERENT COSTS. WHAT RECOURSE DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE? IS THAT SOMETHING WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THE INTERIOR OF A BUILDING THAT GOES TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.WHAT WHAT IS THERE TO PROTECT THE APPLICANT? IS THAT FOR STAFF? SO I'LL START I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE PART OF THE CODE THE APPLICANTS DISCUSSING.
THERE ARE OTHER RESIDENT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES THAT ARE OF THIS AGE AND OLDER THAT ARE UNDER REHABILITATION, AND I'VE NOT HEARD THAT BEFORE. IF THE APPLICANT DOESN'T AGREE WITH THE COMMISSION'S MOTION THE APPLICANT COULD APPEAL TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS. SO JUST CLARIFICATION.
SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT AT THE POINT OF DISCOVERY, WHEN WHEN Y'ALL ARE IN THERE AND YOU RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S NO HEADER OVER THE EXTERIOR WALLS, AND THAT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY MAY REQUIRE A HEADER OVER THE WINDOWS? IS THAT THE POINT THAT THEY WOULD TAKE IT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT? NO, I MEAN, WE WOULD WE WOULD. THERE ARE I GUESS I SHOULD BACK UP.
RIGHT, EDWARD. BUT BUT IF THE THING THAT IMPLICATES THE THE INSPECTION IS MODIFICATION WHERE THERE IS NO HEADER, WHEREAS IF THEY DON'T MODIFY IT AND THERE'S NO HEADER, THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO A MODIFICATION. MY UNDERSTANDING IS REGARDLESS HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO MODIFY THE FATHER HIT HER. ISN'T IT FOLLOW LIKE AN 88 RULE? I MEAN, WHERE IF IT'S THERE, THE WINDOW IS THERE AND THE HOUSE EXISTS, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO COME IN AND SOMEBODY HAS TO PUT A HITTER IN.
NO, BUT I THINK WHAT THE APPLICANT THIS IS MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE APPLICANT IS CURRENTLY SAYING THAT THERE'S NO HEADER AND THAT HE'S BEING TOLD FROM A FRAME, FROM A FRAMING INSPECTION PERSPECTIVE, HE HAS TO DO THIS.
SIR, ARE YOU BEING TOLD YOU HAVE TO PUT A HEADER IN THERE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE A HEADER? OR ARE YOU BEING TOLD YOU HAVE TO PUT A HEADER IN THERE IF YOU MODIFY THE FENESTRATION, THE WINDOW.
MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN THAT ONCE WE OPENED UP A WALL THAT HAS A A WINDOW IN IT FOR THE EXTERIOR, WE HAVE TO TOUCH THAT COMPLETE WALL ALL THE WAY ACROSS AND BRING IT UP TO CODE.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. SO THAT'S THE THAT'S THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT IS CREATED BY THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, EDWARD. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, THAT'S WHY WE WERE PETITIONING FOR NEW WINDOWS.
WE'RE GOING TO HEAD AROUND. WE WANTED THE NEW WINDOWS WITH THAT MEET THE GUIDELINES.
SO THANK YOU. CAN I MAKE A MOTION? YES, PLEASE MAKE YOUR MOTION.
A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM ONE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER TWO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM THREE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. I'LL SECOND IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECOND.
FURTHER DISCUSSION PLEASE. YEAH I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY. SO I DID REMOVE THAT VERTICAL PIECE.
OKAY. SO I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A VERY VERY LONG TIME.
IF YOU'RE REMOVING A WALL, LIKE RECONSTRUCTING A WHOLE THING, THAT'S DIFFERENT, BUT YOU'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE GOING TO REMOVE SOMETHING TO CREATE SOME NEW SHEETROCK, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO DISCUSSION ON THAT BECAUSE THAT'S NOT EVEN OUR PURVIEW. THE MOTION, AS IT IS RIGHT NOW IS YOU DON'T GET THE WHOLE SALE WOOD WINDOW REPLACEMENT OF ALL THE WINDOWS.
THAT STILL LEAVES YOU AS AN OPTION IF YOU COME INTO TROUBLE AND IT MAKES YOU, YOU KNOW, HAVE ADDITIONAL YOU FIND A WINDOW THAT IS REPAIRABLE BEYOND REPAIR, OR YOU FIND THAT YOU HAVE TO MODIFY THE OPENINGS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PUT IN HEADERS.
THIS IS JUST THE MOTION IS JUST NOT LETTING YOU MODIFY ALL THE WINDOWS, RIGHT.
SO WE'RE GOING TO GO LIKE BASED ON THE SITE VISIT BASED ON ALL THE ONE.
SO THAT MIGHT THERE MIGHT BE AN OPTION IN YOU IN THE FUTURE.
I THINK THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE FACING IS THAT JUST FINDING THE WINDOWS THAT WE'RE LACKING FOR THE ADDITION, IT THESE WINDOWS ARE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO FIND.
AND IN ADDITION YOU CAN PUT THE ADDITION IS DIFFERENT, RIGHT? EDWARD, THIS IS REPLACING THE WINDOWS THAT ARE IN NOT THE WINDOWS FOR THE ADDITION.
[00:55:05]
THAT IS THE WINDOWS FOR ADDITION HAS JUST YOU JUST HAVE TO MEET THE STIPULATIONS.THAT IS CORRECT. SO WITH THE STIPULATIONS AS FAR AS GUIDELINES, THE WINDOWS THAT WE HAVE FOR THE BACK ARE THE ONES THAT WE WANTED TO USE THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE HOUSE TO GIVE IT A UNIFORM CONSISTENCY SO THAT IT DOESN'T BREAK THE CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE.
AND THAT'S KIND OF I THINK THE CHARACTER IS THE OLD WINDOWS.
BUT ONCE, LIKE I MENTIONED, IF WE START TOUCHING THE WINDOWS AS FAR AS PUTTING HEADERS, THEY BECOME THESE ARE 100 YEAR OLD WINDOWS, RIGHT. SO AS SOON AS THEY'RE PULLED OUT OF POSITION, THEY'RE GOING TO TWEAK AND WARP.
I EXPERIENCED IT ALL THE TIME BECAUSE OUR HANDS ARE ON IT.
WOOD IS WOOD. WOOD IS GOING TO HAVE WARP OR MOVEMENT IN IT.
THAT'S JUST YOU CAN YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO REPLACE THEM UNLESS THERE'S ART BEYOND REPAIR.
AND THAT'S REALLY ALL IT REALLY BOILS DOWN TO.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT. IT'S NOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S ESTHETICALLY PLEASING.
I MEAN, IT'S IT'S ABOUT WHAT THE GUIDELINES OFFER.
AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE, AND YOU MENTIONED YOURSELF, IT'S A HUNDRED YEAR OLD WINDOW. OKAY. SO THEREFORE WE YOU HAVE TO DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THEM AS BEST AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.
AND IF IT'S BEYOND THAT POINT, THEN YOU SIMPLY COME BACK TO OPIE? HEY, YOU KNOW THIS IS BEYOND REPAIR. WHAT ARE MY OPTIONS HERE? AND THEN WE GO FROM THERE. THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY THING I SUBMITTED WHAT WAS ON THE GUIDELINES, AND THAT WAS MY REQUEST. WHAT WAS IN THE GUIDELINES OF THE WEBSITE? GOT IT. SIR. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. OKAY, SIR. YES. AT THE SITE WE DID NOTICE.
I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT WE DID SEE THAT WHERE THE FRONT DOOR IS BEING REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH THE WINDOW, THAT THE EXISTING FRAMING DID HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THERE HAD BEEN A COMPANION WINDOW IN THAT LOCATION.
SO I'M GLAD THAT THE OWNER HAS AGREED TO THAT STIPULATION.
THE WINDOWS DO HAVE FRAMING ABOVE THEM. IT MAY NOT BE WHAT THE CURRENT FRAMING REQUIREMENTS ARE, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE WORKED OUT WITH DSD AND OPI.
WHETHER EXISTING HEADERS NEED TO BE MODIFIED SO THERE IS FRAMING ABOVE THOSE WINDOWS.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. AND THEN THE LAST THING IS THAT PART OF THE GUIDELINES IS THAT ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES, YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WHAT'S ORIGINAL AND WHAT IS THE ADDITION, WHICH WAS WHY NEW WINDOWS, ALUMINUM CLAD OR WOOD WINDOWS COULDN'T BE USED, CAN BE USED IN THE ADDITION WHICH IS PART OF THE MOTION. BUT THAT'S ALSO WHAT THE REASON FOR THAT VERTICAL TRIM PIECE WAS.
SO THAT IN THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS AND OTHER HISTORIANS CAN TELL WHAT'S NEW AND WHAT'S HISTORIC.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MA'AM. SORRY, COMMISSIONER.
WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. I THANK YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES. THANK YOU. SAVINO I VELAZQUEZ I GALLOWAY I MAZURKA I GROUP I CERVANTES. YES, HALLEN I FETZER I AND GIBBS I MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.
THAT WAS THE LAST CASE ON THE AGENDA. WE ARE ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU. EVERYONE HERE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.