* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:02] I'D LIKE [Roll Call] TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19TH. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? FERNANDEZ FISH GIBBS. HERE, VELASQUEZ. HERE. OLA. HERE. MARTINEZ FLORES CARPENTER. HERE. . HERE. BOWMAN FETZER. HERE. LFO HERE. LA HERE. AND BEFORE WE READ THE CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT, UH, WE HAVE A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING TRANSLATION SERVICES FOR THE MEETING. THE [Chairman’s Statement] HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN AND THE VICE CHAIR OF SCOTT CARPENTER. IT IS THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER AND ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY, IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY, AND FOR DEMOLITIONS. AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPT ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL. AN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF OR AN OPPOSITION TO ANY ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE SIGN UP ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT SHEET. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SIGN UP. IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF OR REPRESENTATIVE FOR A PROJECT ON THE AGENDA, YOU'LL BE CALLED ON AS THE CASE IS CALLED. CASE REPRESENTATIVES WILL BE GIVEN NO MORE THAN 20 MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR CASE WITH AN ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. SPEAKERS FOR, OR OPPOSED TO A CASE WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. EACH SPEAKERS MAY ALSO SIGN UP TO YIELD THEIR THREE 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'RE SIGNED UP FOLLOWING PUBLIC TESTIMONY. ANY COMMISSIONER MAY CALL UPON ANY SPEAKER TO RESPOND TO FURTHER QUESTIONS. APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF ANY TYPE OF PERMIT. PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ALL WORK. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR WORK APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE E 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. UM, WELL GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. THANK YOU FOR, UH, BEING HERE. UM, WE DO HAVE A QUICK ANNOUNCEMENT. [Announcements] UM, OUR NEXT REALTOR TRAINING, UH, COURSE ON CITY PROCESSES AND RESOURCES, UM, WILL BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 25TH AT 10:00 AM AM UM, RE REALTORS IN INTERESTED IN RE RECEIVING THAT HISTORIC, UH, HOUSE SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION, UM, CAN REGISTER, UM, SA PRESERVATION.COM. UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CITIZENS SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS, BUT IF I'LL, UH, DRAW YOUR ATTENTION ['A' CONSENT AGENDA] TO THE SCREEN. WE HAVE FOUR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. UM, WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS FOR ITEM A FOUR, SO THAT'LL BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY. UM, RIGHT NOW WE CAN TAKE A, A MOTION FOR THE REMAINDER ITEMS, A ONE THROUGH A THREE. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS A ONE THROUGH A THREE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. YOU'RE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS 100 LABOR 600 CESAR CHAVEZ 38 0 1 BROADWAY, AND EIGHT 15 EAST ASHBY. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAILED YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. IF YOU HAVE NOT YET RETURNED THE PUBLIC NOTICE, YARD SIGN PLACED ON THE PROPERTY, PLEASE DO SO AT THE O H P COUNTER ON THE FIRST FLOOR. YES. SO THAT [A-4 20-2178 Address/Description: 210 N FLORES ST/107 W HOUSTON HDRC Case No.: 2020-026 Applicant: Samuel White/Michael G. Imber, Architects Request: Construction of a restaurant within existing green space City Council Dist.: 1] BRINGS US TO ITEM A 4 2 10. NORTH FLOOR IS 1 0 7 WEST HOUSTON. UM, I'LL CALL THE SPEAKER AT FIRST AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT UP IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE. AND WHEN YOU DO SPEAK, I ASK THAT YOU, UM, SAY YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS INTO THE MICROPHONE AND SPEAK CLEARLY FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, 91 18 FAIRLAND, UH, SAN ANTONIO, AND I'M REPRESENTING THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO OPPOSES THE APPLICATION FOR THE PARK AT 1 0 7 WEST HOUSTON STREET. THIS PROPOSAL REPRESENTS SUCH A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION TWO YEARS AGO THAT IT COULD BE CALLED A BAIT AND SWITCH. THAT APPLICATION DISCUSSED A LANDSCAPED PARK WITH [00:05:01] A SERPENTINE PATH AND UNSPECIFIED RETAIL. THE PROPOSAL APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION A FEW MONTHS AGO, LATER IN JUNE, 2018, INCLUDED DRAWINGS THAT SHOWED NO BUILDING BEYOND A GAZEBO AND SOME SHADE STRUCTURES. THAT PROPOSAL SAID THERE WOULD BE SPACE FOR A RETAIL BUILDING AND STATED THIS IS FROM H D R CASE NUMBER 20 18 1 0 9, JUNE 20TH, 2018. ANY FUTURE BUILDING IS RESTRICTED TO A MAXIMUM OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET. THE DESIGN WILL PAY, WILL ALSO PAY HOMAGE TO THE LATE 19TH CENTURY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH THAT USED TO BE ON THE SITE BY INCORPORATING ORIGINAL STONES FROM THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. THE PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU TODAY DOES NONE OF THESE THINGS. YOU ARE ASKED TO APPROVE A RESTAURANT OF 8,000 SQUARE FEET, EVEN IF YOU DO NOT INCLUDE THE EXTERIOR COURTYARD DINING AREA, THE RESTAURANT STILL EXCEEDS 5,000 SQUARE FEET. A PARK WITH A GAZEBO HAS BECOME A RESTAURANT WITH A PARK. IT SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO. PATTY ZION'S, PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. THE APPLICANT. COME FORWARD. PLEASE, PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF. MICHAEL LIMBER WITH MICHAEL LIMBER ARCHITECTS, MAC WHITE WITH MICHAEL LIMBER, ARCHITECTS WITH WESTON URBAN. UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON, UH, WHAT WAS JUST READ FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY? WELL, UM, YEAH, O ON A FEW OF THE, ON ADDRESSING THOSE TWO ISSUES. UH, ONE, WE'VE NEVER, WE WERE GIVEN, YOU KNOW, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PARK TO BE, YOU KNOW, FIVE, YOU KNOW, FOUR TO 5,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING. UH, THE BUILDING IS, UH, AIR CONDITIONED UNDER THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE. THERE'S NO DEFINITION OF WHAT FOUR TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET IS. SO WE WERE UNDER, IN TERMS OF AIR CONDITIONED SQUARE FOOTAGE. UH, AS FAR AS, UH, THE REQUIREMENT OF THE STONE, UH, WE WEREN'T INVOLVED WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE INITIAL PARK. UH, SO WE'RE NOT SURE, UH, WHAT THAT APPROVAL IS, BUT THAT STONE HAS BEEN USED, UH, TO CREATE AN ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF, UH, THE, THE OLD PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH CLOSER TO WHERE THAT PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, UH, WAS LOCATED WITHIN THE PARK FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND. MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE TALKED FIRST, I'M SORRY, MICHAEL . UM, SO WE DID INCORPORATE, UM, SOME DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT SORT OF SPOKE TO THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH FOOTPRINT THAT WAS AT THE CORNER OF, UM, HOUSTON STREET AND FLORES STREET. AND SO IN THE PARK PROMENADE, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE A NOD TO THAT FOOTPRINT. AND WE DIDN'T USE THE, THE STONE THAT WAS USED WAS FROM THE OLD FROST MOTOR BANK. AND, UM, IT WAS, SO I DON'T THINK IT WAS PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH STONE, BUT IT WAS A STONE WE WERE INCORPORATING TO BE IN THAT SAME AREA. AND, UH, THAT IS ACTUALLY INSTALLED NOW. UM, THE, THE PARK PROPER WILL WILL OPEN IN APRIL. IT'S ALMOST COMPLETE, BUT ALL OF OF THAT WAS INCORPORATED. UM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, I'M, I'M, I'M NOT FOLLOWING HOW THAT WAS PUT TO BE INCORPORATED INTO PINKERTON'S BARBECUE. UM, IT'S IN A DIFFERENT PORTION OF THE SITE. AND, UM, SO I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND, AND TAKE A, A QUICK LOOK AT THAT. BUT AS FAR AS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE GOES, UH, WE WERE TRYING TO KEEP WITHIN THE FOUR TO 5,000 SQUARE FOOT RANGE, WHICH OUR CONDITION SPACE FOR THIS RESTAURANT IS, IS IN THAT THRESHOLD. UM, THERE ARE PORCHES AND, UH, EXTERIOR BARBECUE PIT THAT KIND OF, UH, FEEL LIKE AN IMMERSION INTO THE PARK. YOU'RE OUTSIDE, YOU'RE NOT INSIDE AN ENCLOSED WALL. AND SO FOR THAT REASON, WE, YOU KNOW, TRIED TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT THE TENANT, UH, WAS EXPECTING FOR SERVING BARBECUE IN DOWNTOWN SAN ANTONIO, INSIDE OF A PARK. SO, AND I THINK WE DO HAVE THAT CONCEPTUAL PLAN AVAILABLE TO SHOW, UM, WHAT WAS APPROVED PREVIOUSLY. AND SO IT IS UNSPECIFIED, BUT IT'S [00:10:01] THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE RESTAURANT. RIGHT. AND AS WE BEGAN TO, UH, WORK THE FOUR TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET INTO THAT RED CIRCLE ON THE PLAN, UM, INSIDE THAT RED CIRCLE, THERE ARE SEVERAL EXISTING OAK TREES PERIMETER, OAK TREES TO BOUND THIS SITE. AND SO IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THOSE TREES, WE TRIED TO SCOOT THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT A LITTLE FARTHER OUT. SO WHAT YOU SEE THERE IN FRONT OF THOSE TREES IS THE TREES ACTUALLY COMING UP THROUGH THE PORCH AND THE, THE ROOF. UM, BUT THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, WE HAD TO, TO SCOOT OVER A LITTLE BIT TO THE EAST. AND, UM, AND I DON'T KNOW, MICHAEL, IF YOU COULD KIND OF POINT TO THAT UP THERE, UM, WHAT THE CONDITION SPACE IS. OKAY. CONDITION SPACE FALLS UNDER, YOU'LL HAVE TO SPEAK TO THE MICROPHONE FOR US. THANK YOU. THE CONDITIONED SPACE FALLS IN THIS AREA OF THE BUILDING, SO UNDERNEATH THESE MAIN GABLES. AND THEN WITHIN, UH, THIS AREA HERE, THAT'S, UH, THAT'S A SHED ROOF COMING OFF OF THAT GABLE. AND THEN UNDER THE FLAT ROOF AREA FOR PROPER, UH, I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT THE PIT ROOM HAS ALSO BEEN DETAILED IN A MANNER SO THAT IT HAS, UH, SCREEN PANEL WALLS TO ALLOW FOR SOME TRANSPARENCY THROUGH THAT, MAKING A CONNECTION THROUGH THAT TO, FROM THE OUTER PARK EDGE INTO THE PARK ITSELF. BUT WE HAVE WORKED WITH O H P, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND, AND MADE SURE THAT THEY'RE OKAY WITH, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. SO, UM, THIS HAS BEEN THROUGH, UM, YEAH, THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'RE DOING AND, AND MOVING FORWARD WITH IT. UH, ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF. THIS IS, PLEASE CLARIFY, THIS IS A PRIVATE PROPERTY AND NOT A CITY PARK, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. UM, AND THIS ALSO IS NOT IN ANY HISTORIC ZONE. I WAS IN A COUPLE OF THE DRCS UH, REVIEWING THIS, UM, APPLICATION. AND, UM, MYSELF AND SOME FELLOW COMMISSIONERS MADE COMMENTS ON THE, THERE WAS AN EARLIER DESIGN OF THIS THAT, UH, FELT, UH, MORE RURAL AS OPPOSED TO URBAN. AND WE ASKED THE DESIGNERS TO GO BACK AND, UH, LOOK AT THE DETAILING AND MATERIALS ON, UM, THE MAIN STRUCTURES HERE. AND THEY HAVE, UH, DONE THAT, UM, BRINGING IN, UH, MORE MASONRY AS OPPOSED TO, UH, SIDING OR, UM, CORRUGATED METAL. THEY CHANGED THE MAIN ROOF FROM, UH, CORRUGATED METAL TO STANDING SEAM. EXCUSE ME. AND, UH, SO THEY HAVE RESPONDED TO, UH, COMMENTS BY, UH, THE D R C ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS. COULD YOU INDICATE ON THAT, UH, EARLIER SITE PLAN OF THE, OF THE OVERALL PARK WHERE THE STONES WERE REUSED? IS IT DOWN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER WHERE THERE LOOKS LIKE THE OUTLINE OF A BUILDING? YEAH, CAN, SO IT'S, IT'S DOWN. SO JUST RIGHT. CAN YOU RIGHT ON THAT LINE OF THE SIDEWALK. IT'S, IT'S RIGHT THERE. THERE'S A, THERE'S SOME, UM, LIMESTONES AND THEN THERE'S SOME RUBBLE WALLS AND THEN LIMESTONES. AND THAT WAS KIND OF TO CREATE THE BOUNDARY OF THAT EXISTING ORIGINAL CHURCH. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT MATERIAL WASN'T ORIGINALLY FROM THAT CHURCH, IT WAS FROM ANOTHER STRUCTURE AND, YOU KNOW, I WASN'T EVEN PART OF THE WESTERN URBAN TEAM WHEN ALL OF THAT CAME, CAME TO BE. UM, BUT WE WERE TRYING TO REUSE STONES THAT WERE ON THE OLD FROST MOTOR BANK AND JUST KEEP THAT CONTINUITY OF MATERIALS. UM, THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY TO THAT LAND, AND IT WAS PUT THERE AS A PARK. AND I THINK OUR, OUR GOAL WAS TO KEEP IT, EVEN THOUGH IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY, TO KEEP IT AS MUCH AS A PARK SPACE AS POSSIBLE. UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, ADDING THE RESTAURANT WAS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE MANNER TO OPERATE IT AS A PARK. AND, AND I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE IDEA OF RETAINING MATERIAL AND RECYCLING, REPURPOSING AND REINCORPORATING IT IN. AND, AND, UH, I THINK THIS IS MORE, A MORE EFFECTIVE AND MORE HONORABLE WAY OF DOING THAT THAN SAY, INCORPORATING IT INTO THE RESTAURANT STRUCTURE ITSELF, WHERE IT COULD POTENTIALLY KIND OF LOSE ANY KIND OF IDENTITY OR CONNECTION TO, TO TELLING THAT INTERPRETIVE STORY OF THE, OF THE SITE. SO I, I THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE OF THAT MATERIAL IS IS THERE ANY PARKING PROVIDED FOR THIS FACILITY? NO, NOT ANY PARKING PER SE. WE ARE ADDING IN, UH, [00:15:02] 20 BIKE RACKS, 20 BIKE RACKS RELATED TO THE TRAFFIC COMMENTS THAT CAME OUT OF THE CD, UM, THAT CAME OUT OF THE SUBMISSION. THIS ALSO SITS ACROSS THE STREET FROM A VERY LARGE PARKING BLOCK, UH, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE LOT. HAVE YOU, UH, REVIEWED STAFF'S, UH, STIPULATIONS THAT THEY INCLUDED THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND YOU'RE OKAY WITH ALL OF THOSE? OKAY, SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER CONVERSATION, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. THE MOTION IS SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AGENDA [A-5 20-2130 Address/Description: 106 S ST MARYS HDRC Case No.: 2020-043 RIO District: RIO-3 Applicant: Fernando Morales/Aetna Sign Group Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 1] ITEM A FIVE, CASE NUMBER 20 20 0 4 3 AT 1 0 6 SOUTH ST. MARY'S. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL ONE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED BLADE SIGN TO READ PARK, AND ONE ALAMO LOGO. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE NEW PARK SIGN BASED ON FINDINGS B THROUGH F WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. ONE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE SIGN IS REDUCED TO THE EXACT HEIGHT OF THE SECOND FLOOR MARKED BY THE MORTAR JOINTS, AND TWO, THAT THE DIRECTIONAL ARROW CABINET COLORS ARE REVERSED. TO FEATURE A WHITE ARROW WITH MEDIUM BLUE BLACKING BACKING THE APPLICANT HERE, PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON, I'M LARRY GOTTMAN, PRESIDENT OF AETNA SIGN GROUP. AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND BEGIN IF, OKAY. UH, WELL, WE'RE ALREADY GIVING UP ON ONE OF THE ITEMS. WE ARE GONNA LOWER THE SIGN TO WHERE IT'S EVEN WITH THAT, UM, UM, YEAH, THE MORTAR JOINTS. UM, AS FAR AS THE, CAN YOU PUT THE ONE WITH THE WHITE AND THE BLUE ON THERE FOR ME? UM, THERE'S ANOTHER MARKET STREET GARAGE RIGHT NEXT DOOR, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO GET AS MUCH DEFINITION ON OUR PARKING GARAGE AS POSSIBLE. THAT'S WHY WE WOULD LIKE TO USE THE WHITE ARROW. WE THINK IT GIVES IT BETTER CONTRAST THAN GOING BLUE ALL THE WAY DOWN. AND OUR SIGN IS CONSIDERABLY SMALLER THAN THE OTHER ONE. AND WE'D REALLY LIKE TO LET PEOPLE KNOW AS HANDLY AS POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW WHERE TO ENTER THE GARAGE. AND WE, WE BELIEVE THAT COLOR SCHEME DOES A BETTER JOB AND STAFF CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF. THE REASON YOU WANTED TO SWITCH THAT IS JUST SO THERE WASN'T SO MUCH GLOWING WHITE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. WELL, AND I'LL ADD, I MEAN, THE GUIDELINES ACTUALLY DO ENCOURAGE LIGHT LETTERS ON DARK BACKGROUNDS. SO THIS IS NOT A LETTER, BUT WE FEEL LIKE IT'S MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE GUIDELINES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT. AND WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER STIPULATION? ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? YES. THE WORD LOCATION, I KIND OF AGREE WITH STAFF. I I DON'T THINK IT MAKES THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE. I WOULD AGREE THAT I THINK STAFF HAS THIS ONE CORRECT ALSO. UM, I CONCUR WITH THAT. UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. [A-6 20-2081 Address/Description: 3500 BROADWAY HDRC Case No.: 2020-047 RIO District: RIO-1 Applicant: Jose Castillo/C&S Wired Electric Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 2] A AGENDA ITEM A SIX, CASE NUMBER 20 20 0 4 7 AT 3,500 BROADWAY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE THE EXISTING CABINET SIGN WITH INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS MOUNTED ON A RACEWAY, AND TWO, TO PAINT THE WOOD REDWOOD SHAKE SHINGLES WHITE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN TENANTS AND TO PROVIDE A CONTRASTING BACKGROUND TO THE PROPOSED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE SIGNAGE BASED ON FINDING C STAFF [00:20:01] DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO PARTIAL ROOF PAINTING BASED ON FINDING D THE UNAPPROVED MODIFICATIONS SHOULD BE REVERSED, WHICH MAY REQUIRE REPAINTING THE ENTIRE MULTI-TENANT STRUCTURES. ROOF TO UNIFORM COLOR. A CASE COMMENT, THE WORK WAS ALREADY DONE PRIOR TO APPROVAL. APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. ARE THERE ANY, UH, DEADLINES APPROACHING ON THIS ONE OR WE GOOD? UM, NO, BUT THERE, THIS IS A SORT OF A COMPLIANCE CASE AT THIS POINT. UM, THE WORK HAS BEEN DONE ALREADY. I, SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, IN LIEU OF THE, UH, THE FACT THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT ISN'T HERE, BUT SINCE IT IS A COMPLIANCE CASE, UM, I THINK STAFF HAS THIS ONE CORRECT AND I WOULD MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH, UH, STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. MOTION A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAYYY. MOTION PASSES. AGENDA [A-7 20-2085 Address/Description: 3613 BROADWAY HDRC Case No.: 2020-056 RIO District: RIO-1 Applicant: Paul Rohlfs/Budget Signs Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 2] ITEM A SEVEN, CASE NUMBER 20 20 0 56. AT 36 13 BROADWAY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE AN EXISTING POLL SIGN WITH A NEW FREESTANDING SIGN TO FEATURE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CABINET TO RETRIEVER BOOKS, BUY, SELL, USED AND RARE BOOKS. THE PROPOSED SIGN WILL FEATURE A TOTAL SIGN AREA OF 24 SQUARE FEET FOR EACH SIDE AND WILL FEATURE AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON FINDING B THROUGH F WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. ONE THAT THE PROPERTY IS LIMITED TO THREE TOTAL SIGNS, WHICH MAY REQUIRE REMOVING ONE OF THE HANGING BANNER SIGNS. TWO, THAT THE SIGN FACE FEATURE A DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION THAT REDUCES GLARE, SUCH AS ONE OF THE FOLLOWING. TO FEATURE BACKLIT REVERSE CHANNEL LETTERS AND LOGOS TO REVERSE THE COLOR COMPOSITION TO FEATURE WHITE LETTERS AND DARK BACKGROUND COLOR, OR TO FEATURE A WOOD OR METAL SIGNBOARD WITH INDIRECT LIGHT THAT IS CONCEALED BY A HOOD OR DIFFUSER. UPDATED DRAWINGS AND RENDERINGS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. AND THREE, THAT THE SIGN SYSTEM FEATURE WOOD OR METAL SIGNBOARD FIXED TO TWO WOOD POSTS INSTEAD OF THE PROPOSED CABINET SIGN MOUNTED ON TOP OF METAL POLE LEGS. APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M PAUL ROLFES WITH BUDGET SIGNS. UH, WE'RE LOCATED AT 28 0 1 WEST AVENUE. UM, FIRST OFF, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, DISCUSS THIS SIGN. UM, AND, UH, WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE, UH, ASSISTANCE THAT WE GOT FROM, UH, HISTORIC STAFF. EDWARD AND HUEY WERE VERY HELPFUL. UH, THEY CAME AND VISITED WITH US AT LEAST TWICE OUT ON THE SITE. EDWARD MAY HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN THERE THREE TIMES TO MEET WITH US, UM, BUT THIS, UH, SIGNED PROPOSAL HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF. UM, WE HOPE THAT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS, UH, SHOW THE EFFORT MADE TO OFFER A SIGN THAT IS APPROPRIATE TO BENEFIT ACHIEVER BOOKS, BUT ALSO A DESIGN, UH, THAT WE HOPE WILL BE ACCEPTABLE TO H D R C. THE ISSUES ON THIS SIGN, UH, REALLY ARE, ARE FIVEFOLD. THEY'RE, UM, PLACEMENT BECOMES AN ISSUE TO DISCUSS, UH, CABINET SIZE, OVERALL HEIGHT DESIGN AND ILLUMINATION. UH, THE PLACEMENT, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU CAN SEE, UH, IN THAT PICTURE, BUT, UH, THERE ARE, THERE ARE MATURE, UH, CREPE MYRTLES IN THE GRASSY AREA ALONG THE STREET IN FRONT OF THIS ADDRESS, AS WELL AS BOTH NEIGHBORING BUILDINGS AT 36 11 AND 36 17. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT, . OKAY. I'M, I'M, I'M NEW WITH THIS GUYS. I'M SORRY. I APOLOGIZE. . OH, I AM. OKAY. OH, THERE, LOOK AT THAT. OKAY. HERE'S YOUR CRE PEARLS THIS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN FULL, YOU KNOW, COVER RIGHT NOW IN THIS PICTURE. UH, RIGHT NOW, IF YOU DRIVE BY TODAY, OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE GONNA BE JUST, JUST TWIGS. UM, YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDING A LOT EASIER NOW, BUT NOT, UH, IN WHEN THEY'RE IN FULL BLOOM. UM, UH, SO WE HAVE CREPE MYRTLES ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS BUILDING, BOTH 36 11 AND 36 17. UH, THESE CREPE MYRTLES, UM, LIMIT THE VISIBILITY OF ANY FREESTANDING SIGN AS WELL AS VISIBILITY TO THE BUILDING ITSELF, A DEFINITE HARDSHIP IMPOSED BY THIS LOCATION. FOR THIS LOCATION TO ACCOMMODATE. FOR THE CREPE MYRTLES, THE BEST PLACEMENT FOR THE SIGN IS TO [00:25:01] SLIDE IT BACK TOWARD THE BUILDING. SO YOU CAN SEE, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREET AS SHOWN IN THIS IMAGE. UM, UH, THIS, THIS WILL HELP US TO, UH, IMPROVE OUR, OUR NARROW LINES OF SIGHT BETWEEN THE VARIOUS CREPE MYRTLES IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING ARE FOUR PARKING SPACES. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THAT AS WELL, PARKING IS LIMITED FOR ALL THESE BUSINESSES ALONG BROADWAY. UH, WE HAVE PLACED A SIGN BETWEEN TWO HEAD-END PARKING, UH, SPACES SO AS NOT TO LOSE A PARKING SPACE DUE TO THE SIGN WE, WE WILL REMOVE, UH, THE EXISTING NON ILLUMINATED POLE SIGN. IT IS 14 FEET AN OVERALL HEIGHT, AND IT'S A THREE BY SIX CABINET. UH, THE SIGN SIZE, UH, WE SIZE THE SIGN TO THE MAXIMUM SIZE ALLOWED BY U D C. UM, THIS SIZE IS, IS NEEDED AS A SIGN DUE TO THE CREPE MYRTLES IS SETBACK 22 FEET, EIGHT INCHES FROM THE BACK OF THE CURB OF THE NUMEROUS SIGNS ALONG BROADWAY. WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF THIS SITE, THERE WAS ONLY ONE SIGN WITH A GREATER SETBACK, AND THAT'S THE ACORN SCHOOL. UM, THE OTHER DIFFICULTY HERE WITH THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION IS THAT, UH, BROADWAY HAS SEVEN LANES OF TRAFFIC. SO YOU, YOU'RE TRYING TO SEE THIS SIGN FROM A GOOD DISTANCE, A GOOD VIEWING DISTANCE. UM, THE ISSUE OF OVERALL HEIGHT, UM, UH, WE UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, SECTION 35 DASH 6 7 8 LIMITS THE HEIGHT OF THE SIGN TO SIX FEET. THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION. UM, NOT TRYING TO, UM, UM, ARGUE WITH, WITH WHAT IS, WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS. UH, HOWEVER, WE HAVE PROPOSAL SIGNED THAT IS NINE FOOT SIX INCHES, UH, NOT INCLUDING THE 10 INCH EMBELLISHMENT AT THE TOP OF THE SIGN. UH, THE ADDED HEIGHT IS NEEDED, SO PARKED VEHICLES DO NOT BLOCK THE VIEW OF THE SIGN. UM, WE HAVE A, A PHOTO, UH, MAYBE I CAN, I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL, NO, UH, LET'S SEE. IT'S THE, LET ME, I'VE GOT A, IT'S THIS RIGHT HERE. EDWARD, IF YOU DON'T MIND SHOWING THAT. I, I WAS DOING A LITTLE BIT MORE SURVEY WORK ON THIS PROJECT ON SATURDAY, AND SATURDAY MORNING IS A GREAT TIME TO GET OUT BEFORE ALL THE TRAFFIC, UH, GETS BUSY. AND SURE ENOUGH, HERE, HERE'S A CAR PARKED, UH, THERE AT THE SITE. AND THE RACKS, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE, BUT THE RACK ON THIS, UH, VEHICLE IS SIX, UM, 78 INCHES, OR SIX FOOT SIX INCHES. AND THAT'S THE, UH, HEIGHT, THAT'S THE, AT THE HEIGHT OF THE BOTTOM OF THE CABINET. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A PICKUP TRUCK, UH, THEN IT'S, IT TOO WILL BLOCK THE SIGN. HENCE, SO SORRY, I KNOW I SHOULD GET THAT. OKAY. THERE'S YOUR RACK RIGHT HERE. SO, AND THIS, THIS, THIS SIGN IS GONNA BE RIGHT BEHIND WHERE THIS VEHICLE IS PARKED. SO THAT, THAT, THAT REALLY HELPED, UH, ME TO UNDERSTAND THAT YES, THAT THE ADDED, THE HEIGHT WOULD BE NEEDED. UM, THE DESIGN WHEN DESIGNING THE SIGN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WAS GIVEN TO THE HISTORIC BUILDING AND ITS SURROUNDINGS AND THE RELATED HARDSHIPS. THE SUPPORTS OF THIS SIGN ARE FOUR INCH BY EIGHT INCH STEEL TUBING, NOT ROUND PIPE OR POLES. THESE TWO GREATER, UH, ARE GREATER STRUCTURALLY THAN WHAT IS NEEDED FOR THIS SIZE OF A SIGN. WE INCREASE THE SIZE OF THESE SUPPORTS IN CASE A VEHICLE BUMPS THE SUPPORTS, BUMPS THE SIGN. UH, THESE SUPPORTS SHOULD BE STRONG ENOUGH TO NOT BEND WITH A SLOW MOVING VEHICULAR CONTACT. WE UNDERSTAND POLE MOUNTED, UH, CABINETS ARE, UH, PROHIBITED. UM, WE GOT IT. BUT TO MEET THE DEFINITION OF A MONUMENT SIGN, WE WOULD NEED TO ADD SOME TYPE OF CONTINUOUS SKIRTING FROM THE GROUND TO THE BOTTOM OF THE CABINET. THIS COULD BE DONE HOWEVER, THE ANTICIPATED VEHICULAR CONTACT WITH, WITH THE SKIRTING, UH, WILL DEFINITELY, UH, DAMAGE THE SKIRTING. UM, AND WE CAN ANTICIPATE THAT A VEHICLE WILL BUMP IT FOR THIS REASON, HARDSHIPS, UH, FOR THIS REASON AND RELATIVE HARDSHIP, BUT THE SKIRTING IS NOT PRACTICAL. IN ADDITION, WE, WE DESIGNED THE SIGN WITH TUBULAR POSTS TO MATCH THE COLUMNS TO CLOSELY MATCH THE COLUMNS. THE COLUMNS ARE SQUARE POSTS. WE, WE WANTED TO ONLY UTILIZE FOUR INCHES OF DEPTH WITH THESE POSTS IN ORDER TO, YOU KNOW, JUST MINIMIZE THE PARKING ISSUES AS MUCH AS WE COULD, UH, THAT THE, THE SPACE NEEDED FOR THE SIGN. UM, UH, THE SKIRTING WOULD, UH, I'M SO SORRY. UM, THE, IN THE BUILDING, AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT YOU, YOU'VE GOT THIS, THOSE, UH, SQUARE COLUMNS, COLUMNS, UM, TO DECORATE THE SUPPORTS. WE INCLUDED SOME SUBTLE, UH, DECORATIVE ELEMENTS TO TIE THE SIGN TO THE BUILDING. ARCHITECTURALLY, YOU CAN SEE THE, THESE LITTLE ELEMENTS RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT THERE. THOSE ELEMENTS WERE ADDED, UH, TO, TO LOOK LIKE THE POSTS ON THE BUILDING. [00:30:01] UM, WE ALSO INCLUDE AN EMBELLISHMENT AT THE TOP OF THE SIGN, UH, THAT TOP OF THE SIGN, IF YOU CAN, UH, GO BACK TO THE PICTURE. WELL, LET'S SEE. I'VE GOT ANOTHER PICTURE HERE THAT I THINK WILL HELP, UH, THAT EMBELLISH THAT IS THE DESIGNED IN A SIMILAR NATURE TO THE EMBELLISHMENT THAT'S AT THE VERY TOP OF THE ENTRY DOORS, UH, GOING INTO THE, THE SUITE. CAN YOU, CAN YOU, YEAH, THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU GUYS VERY MUCH FOR YOUR HELP. AGAIN, STAFF IS VERY APPRECIATE THEIR SUPPORT. THAT'S THE EMBELLISHMENT THAT'S ALSO NOTED ON THE SIGN. UH, AND WE, UM, WE ALSO DID A DECORATIVE FEATURE BETWEEN THE SUPPORTS THIS LITTLE, ALMOST LIKE A LIFE PRESERVER IMAGE. UH, THAT'S, UH, UH, THAT'S DUPLICATING THIS, UM, WINDOW ON THE, ON THE BUILDING, TRYING TO BRING IN SOME CHARACTER, UH, TO TIE THE SIGN TO THE BUILDING. UM, OKAY. UH, THE SIGN WILL BE PAINTED TO CLOSELY MATCH THE LIGHT BEIGE OF THE BUILDING COLUMNS AND THE TRIM PROPOSED ILLUMINATION. THE CABINET WILL BE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED WITH DECORATIVE, UH, WHITE, UH, ACRYLIC FACES, UM, IN AN ATTEMPT TO TRY TO, UM, ACCOMMODATE, UH, STAFF'S. UH, ONE OF STAFF'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE WHITE BACKGROUND VERSUS THE, UH, HAVING A, A WHITE LETTERS ON A BLUE BACKGROUND. UH, THE CLIENT HAS AGREED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT THIS AS AN ALTERNATE, UH, DESIGN, WHICH THAT DESIGN IS THEN WITH A BLUE BACKGROUND WITH THE WHITE LETTERS AS HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. UM, UM, OKAY, WELL THAT'S, THAT'S THE MAJORITY. WE, THE, THE CLIENT, UH, DID A REBRANDING OF THEIR LOGO BACK IN JULY OF 2018, AND THAT'S WHEN ALL THIS, UH, SIGN PROJECT STARTED. SO, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE LOGO HERE ON THE SIGN. AND PART OF OUR CONCERN WAS THAT THE LOGO MAY NOT SHOW UP QUITE AS WELL ON OUR BLUE BACKGROUND, BUT AGAIN, TO ACCOMMODATE, UH, THE WISHES OF STAFF, UH, THE BLUE BACKGROUND WILL BE ACCEPTABLE. THE ONLY, SO THE REAL ISSUE, I THINK AT THIS POINT, BASED ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS, IS THE, UH, TWO THINGS, NOT NOT HAVING A SKIRT, UH, ON THE, UH, SQUARE TUBING. UH, AGAIN, THIS SIGN IS SET BACK. WE, UH, SO FAR FROM THE CURB, IT'S, IT'S NOT LIKE A SIGN THAT'S UP, UP BY THE CURB. UM, UH, AGAIN, CARS, IF THEY'RE THERE, THEY'RE GONNA BE BLOCKING SKIRTING ANYWAY. UH, COULD WE PUT SOME KIND OF SKIRTING ON IT? I MEAN, WE CAN DO IT. UH, UH, UM, BUT THEN YOU WOULDN'T WANT, I DON'T THINK WE'D WANNA PUT MASONRY SKIRTING AGAIN, THAT WOULD, A CAR BUMPING IT WOULD, WOULD, UH, DAMAGE THE MASONRY. UM, AND I, YOU KNOW, I, I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THE EXPANDED METAL. I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT PERFORATED, UH, PANELS, PERFORATED ALUMINUM PANELS. UH, I THOUGHT WE COULD EVEN PUT UP A SOLID, UH, STEEL PLATE, UH, OVER THOSE TWO, UH, TUBULAR, UH, PIECES, COLUMNS, UH, SUPPORTS. I, IF THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED. BUT I, I, WE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, GET, ASK YOUR CONSIDERATION TO LEAVE IT AS, AS IT HAS BEEN PRESENTED IN TERMS OF THE TWO SUPPORTS WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AS SHOWN. UM, I THINK DOES THAT ADDRESS, UH, THE STAFF CONCERNS? SURE. STAFF CAN CLARIFY. UH, UH, ONE COMMENT, UH, THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THE USE OF SKIRTING TO CREATE A MONUMENT SIGN. THAT WAS ONE OF THE, UH, THE OPTIONS THAT STAFF EXPLORED WITH THE APPLICANT ON SITE. HOWEVER, THAT DID NOT REACH THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION. UH, THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION MOSTLY ADDRESSES OR, OR ENCOURAGES THE APPLICANT TO EXPLORE A FREESTANDING POLE SIGN WITH A SIGN FACE MOUNTED BETWEEN TWO, UH, TWO UH, POLES INSTEAD OF WHAT WE'RE READING HERE AS A CABINET MOUNTED ON TOP OF METAL POLES. THANK YOU. YEAH, ACTUALLY, WE, CAN YOU PULL UP THE SIDE VIEW? SO ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS IS THAT, UM, WHAT, WHAT IS REQUIRING THE THICKNESS IS THE INTERNAL ILLUMINATION. IS THAT CORRECT? AND SO ONE OF OUR STIPULATIONS IS THAT EXTERNAL ILLUMINATION BE USED, SO IT WOULD NO LONGER HAVE TO BE A CABINET ON THE POLE. I, I HAVE A COMMENT, UM, IN, IN, IN TERMS OF THE PROXIMITY FOR STAFF, IN TERMS OF PROXIMITY TO THE BUILDING, UH, I, I KINDA FEEL THAT THE SIGN IS TOO CLOSE TO THE BUILDING. I KNOW THAT IT, IT IS BEING SHIFTED FOR VISIBILITY, BUT AS A DRIVEWAY SAY THERE'S NO CARS PARKED, IT LOOKS A LITTLE ODD WHERE IT IS, IT'S OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE REST OF THE POLES DOWN THE, DOWN THE AISLE. BUT [00:35:01] OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE SITE, RIGHT, YOU SEE THE ENTRANCES, THERE'S A UNIFORMITY THROUGHOUT NOT LOOKING AT ANY OF THAT STUFF. THAT TO ME IS VERY OBVIOUS, RIGHT? BUT THE, THE SIGN SEEMS TO BE TOO CLOSE TO THE BUILDING. I MEAN, WHY DIDN'T Y'ALL RECOMMEND THAT THE SIGN BE SET IN A WAY THAT'S MORE, UH, PROPORTIONAL TO THE, THE DRIVEWAY, THE BUILDING? 'CAUSE RIGHT THERE, IT'S LIKE RIGHT ON TOP OF THE, THE BUILDING AND IT KIND OF THROWS THE BUILDING OFF. YOU ALMOST MISS THAT LAST COLUMN WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT AT AN ANGLE. BECAUSE, BECAUSE IT, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY COMMISSIONERS AGREE, BUT, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE OBJECTIVE IS, BUT PROPORTIONALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE WAY THE ROOF COMES DOWN AND ALL OF THAT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT SHOULD SHIFT BETWEEN THE TWO PARKING SPACES AT LEAST, SO THAT WHEN THE CARS ARE PARKED THERE, THERE'S SOME UNIFORMITY LIKE THAT IT JUST, IT LOOKS LIKE IT, IT, IT, IT SOLVES ONE PROBLEM AND IT CREATES ANOTHER PROBLEM. AND IT COULD BE SOLVED. I AGREE WITH THE, THE SKIRTING WOULDN'T HAVE HELPED IT, IT WOULD'VE MADE IT LOOK EVEN MORE LIKE A, A BOAT PARKED IN THE MIDDLE OF A PARKING LOT, RIGHT? BUT, UM, UM, THAT'S A VALID POINT. I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT THIS IS REVIEWED UNDER RIO. UM, THIS IS NOT A HISTORIC LANDMARK. AND SO IF IT WAS A HISTORIC LANDMARK, WE MIGHT, UH, ADDRESS VISUAL IMPACTS TO THE STRUCTURE. UM, BUT THE ISSUE IS THAT THERE'S SIGN STANDARDS FOR RIO THAT WE'RE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH. DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE, UM, ANY, DO YOU HAVE ANY, UM, ANYTHING AGAINST THE STIPULATION NUMBER ONE THAT IT SAYS YOU'RE LIMITED TO THREE SIGNS, SO WE'D HAVE TO REMOVE ONE OF THE HANGING BANNERS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YEAH, SO THAT'D BE FINE. WE, WE WOULD REMOVE ONE. YES, MA'AM. AND I DON'T THINK, UM, THERE'S ANY ISSUES WITH THE HEIGHT EITHER. I THINK THAT'S FINE. I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOWN TO IS THE LAST, UM, AND THE COLOR, I, I APPRECIATE THAT YOU SWITCHING THE BLUE TO THE WHITE. I THINK IT ALSO KIND OF GOES WITH THE HOME AND, AND I LIKE THE DESIGN OF EVERYTHING. SO I THINK WHAT STAFF IS TRYING TO TELL YOU IS THAT YOU PLACE THAT SIGN BETWEEN TWO WOOD POLES, MAYBE THAT WOULD EVEN IMITATE MORE INSTEAD OF BEING ROUND, BEING SQUARE, LIKE THE ONES ON THE HOUSE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT I DIDN'T HEAR YOU KIND OF TALK ABOUT THAT OPTION? NO. HAVING, HAVING WOOD POLES ISN'T A, A MAKE OR BREAK IN TERMS OF, OF THE LOOK OF THE SIGN. MY CONCERN IS WE COULD PROBABLY GET SOME EIGHT INCH BY EIGHT INCH, UH, WOODEN POSTS, UH, TREATED POSTS. UH, BUT I HAVE TWO CONCERNS THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE AS STRONG AS THIS FOUR BY EIGHT TO TUBULAR, UH, SUPPORTS. AND WE CAN EXPECT THAT A VEHICLE WILL TAP IT. UH, THEY, YOU KNOW, WE HOPE THEY DON'T HIT IT HARD. UH, BUT THAT WOOD IS NOT GONNA BE AS STRUCTURAL AS SUPPORTED AS, AS THE, AS THIS, THE FOUR BY BY EIGHT, UH, TUBULAR SUPPORTS. WE COULD DO EIGHT BY EIGHT TUBULAR SUPPORTS IF, IF THAT'S, UH, MORE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. BUT AGAIN, WE WERE JUST, WE WERE DOING ALL WE COULD TO TRY TO LIMIT AND KEEP IT AS LOW PROFILE WITHIN THOSE PARKING THAT PARKING SPACES AS WE COULD. UH, AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE SUGGESTED JUST, UH, NARROWING IT TO FOUR INCHES OF TUBULAR VERSUS EIGHT INCH WIDTH. SO GIVEN THE, THE SIZE OF THE STEEL THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, I DON'T HAVE, UH, AN ISSUE WITH THE, THE SIZE OF, OR WITH THAT MATERIAL BECAUSE IT, IT, IT'S KIND OF SPEAKING TO WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AS A TIMBER PIECE. I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S SIZED FOR THAT. I MEAN, IT'S GONNA BE THE SAME SIZE. SO I CAN, I CAN GET BEHIND THAT AND I CAN ALSO GET BEHIND THE SIGN SITTING ON TOP OF THE PEDESTAL OF, ON TOP OF THE COLUMNS. BUT THE, THE ISSUE WITH THE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN IS THAT'S THE, THE THING THAT I THINK IS GONNA BE REALLY HARD TO GET PAST HERE. SO I THINK MOVING IT TO THE EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN, UM, THAT WOULD BE MY MAIN CONCERN. AND SO I AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON THE SKIRTING AND THE LOCATION AS WELL. SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY COMMENTS. I CON I CONCUR WITH THE, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, BOWMAN. UH, I THINK, I THINK THE, THE POST, THE, AS YOU'VE PROPOSED, THE EXTRUDED ALUMINUM, SORRY, THE, UH, THE TUBULAR STEEL IS THE WAY TO GO BECAUSE IT'S GONNA BE BRUTALIZED IN THAT PARKING LOT. SO I, I THINK THAT'S, UH, THE WAY TO GO. BUT I THINK THAT TREATMENT OF THE, THE SIGN ABOVE TO KEEP IT FROM FEELING LIKE A CABINET ON STILTS, BUT MORE OF A SIGN THAT'S INTEGRATED WITH THE, WITH THE ILLUMINATED, UM, UH, CERTAINLY ILLUMINATED LETTERS WOULD BE JUST A MORE SOPHISTICATED WAY OF, OF DOING IT. AND, UM, SO I AM SUPPORTING THE HEIGHT AND THE PLACEMENT BECAUSE I KNOW THE, THE SPEED ON BROADWAY OF TRAFFIC IS VERY FAST AND YOU NEED THE VIEW ANGLES THAT YOU HAVE. I'M GLAD YOU'RE WILLING TO TAKE DOWN ONE OF THE BANNERS. I THINK THAT'S A, UH, A GREAT, UH, COMPROMISE. UM, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO GO TO AN EXTERNALLY, UH, ILLUMINATED, UH, SIGN? HONESTLY, IF THAT'S WHAT THE COMMISSION SAYS WE NEED TO DO, WELL, THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO. UH, WE'RE [00:40:01] NOT HERE TO, YEAH, EDWARD BEING KIND AGAIN. AND, YOU KNOW, PART THE, THE, OUR, OUR HOPE WAS THAT WE COULD, UH, BUT MAINTAIN THE ILLUMINATED, INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN WITH THIS OPTIONAL LAYOUT, WITH THE DARK BACKGROUND WITH WHITE LETTERS. UM, AGAIN, IN TERMS OF A GLOW ISSUE, AND I, AND MAYBE YOU'RE SPEAKING MORE TO AN AESTHETIC, UH, HISTORIC, UH, TYPE OF CONCEPT WITH THE DOWN LIGHTING, UH, VERSUS INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED. UM, AND I GET THAT, THAT'S FINE. I, I CAN APPRECIATE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. UM, FROM, UH, FROM OUR STANDPOINT, WE, WE PREFER THE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED, I DON'T KNOW WHERE ON THIS SIGN, I'M NOT SURE HOW WE'RE GONNA ATTACH, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME DOWN LIGHTING HERE. I MEAN THAT YOU CAN SAY, WELL PAUL, THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM. OKAY, THAT'S FINE. I'LL, I'LL, I'LL ACCEPT IT. BUT YOU KNOW, WE, WE DID THAT DECORATIVE TOP, UH, IN ORDER TO TRY TO TIE IN THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. SO, YOU KNOW, THOSE, THAT LAMP, THOSE LAMPS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE DO, UH, UM, BILLBOARD TYPE LIGHTING, DOWN LIGHTING, IT'S GONNA BE UP THERE AND IT'S GONNA PROBABLY BLOCK SOME OF THIS, UH, THIS DECORATIVE TOP. I'M NOT SURE THAT WE EVEN NEED THE DECORATIVE TOP IF WE'RE GONNA PUT THE, THE DOWN LIGHTING ON THERE, UH, 'CAUSE THOSE, THAT'S GONNA BE UP. BUT YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT, THAT AGAIN, THAT THAT'S I YIELD TO YOU. YES. AND I THINK, I THINK STAFF IS, IS GIVING YOU SEVERAL OPTIONS THERE. ONE OF THEM IS THE BACKLIT REVERSE CHANNEL LETTERS, RIGHT? SO YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO TRY TO INCORPORATE SOME KIND OF LIKE GOOSENECK LIGHTING THAT'S, THAT'S REFLECTING ON IT IN THAT SITUATION. BASICALLY THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE HERE. I THINK F IS ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT IF THEY REVERSE THE COLORS, THEN THEY WOULD ALLOW FOR INTERNAL ILLUMINATED IT, RIGHT? FINDING F I WOULD, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT WHAT FACELIFT CHANNEL LETTERS WOULD DO, IS HAVE A SIMILAR GLOW TO WHAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE HERE. UH, THE BLUE WILL HAVE VERY MINIMAL, UM, UM, UH, TRANSLUCENCY TO IT. AND IF STEPH CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I'M, I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS NOT A HISTORIC PROJECT. SO LIKE IN TERMS OF, I WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WOULD MOVE IT RIGHT, BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THIS. SO I WOULD TEND TO LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, TO APPROVE THIS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. THERE IS A U D C PROVISION TO CONSIDER PEDESTRIAN AND, UH, VEHICULAR TRAFFIC IN, UH, INTERACTION WITH THE SIGN. IF A COMMISSIONER FEELS THAT MOVING THE SIGN SLIGHTLY FORWARD OR BACK WOULD HELP, UH, WITH THAT PEDESTRIAN FLOW, THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE, UH, CONSIDERATION. BUT IT'S NOT PART OF SAS'S RECOMMENDATION. AND, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. MY, MY COMMENT SPECIFICALLY AESTHETIC, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FLOW, UH, WHICH IS NOT IN THAT CONTEXT. CAN I JUST CLARIFY THAT MOTION AND SEE, 'CAUSE I THINK STAFF STIPULATION NUMBER ONE SHOULD BE INCLUDED. Y YES, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING AS RECOMMENDED. WELL, UM, AND I THINK STAFF STIPULATION NUMBER TWO COULD PROBABLY BE AS PRESENTED TODAY INSTEAD OF STIPULATION TWO, JUST BEING AS CLIENT PRESENTED TODAY. STIPULATION TWO AND THREE, WELL, I GUESS IT WOULD BE THE, THE, THE TO PERMIT THE USE OF THE STEEL COLUMNS AND, AND THE BOX, BUT BACKLIT THE WAY THAT THE COLORS ARE REVERSED, SO THAT CLARIFY THE MOTION IT CLARIFIED FOR STAFF. WELL THAT'S ONE, RIGHT? SO ONE, TWO AND 1, 2, 1 AND TWO, ONE AND TWO. THAT'S IT. THAT'S IT. YEAH. THANK YOU. SO TO CLARIFY THE MOTION, IT'S, UM, APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS ONE AND WITH THE SIGN AS PRESENTED TODAY WITH REVERSED COLOR SCHEME. EXACTLY. OKAY, THANK YOU. SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. UM, SO COMMISSIONERS, THE TIME IS 3:49 PM UM, THE REMAINDER OF THE ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA WERE POSTED AS TIME CERTAIN FOLLOWING 4:00 PM UM, SO WE'VE GOT ABOUT A 10 MINUTE BREAK, UM, SO WE'LL RECONVENE AFTER THAT. I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR, UH, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19TH, UH, TO CONSIDER THE, UH, AGENDA B ITEMS. YES. THANK YOU. UM, IF EDWARD, IF YOU CAN PULL UP ON THE SCREEN, UM, YEAH. FIRST OF WE'LL HAVE A BRIEF, UM, ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING TRANSLATION SERVICES FOR THE MEETING. [00:45:02] OKAY. BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO UM, THE B ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, [Public Comments] UM, WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED IN FOR GENERAL COMMENTS. UM, THE FIRST IS JOSEPH GARCIA. UM, WHEN YOU SPEAK, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS INTO THE MICROPHONE AND SPEAK CLEARLY. FOR THE RECORD, YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME. MY NAME IS JOSEPH GARCIA. I LIVE AT 9 0 6 EAST CROCKETT STREET IN DIGNITY HILLS. IF YOU WALK WITH ME A LITTLE BIT, I PROMISE THAT THERE WILL BE A POINT TO THIS. THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA FOR 9 11, 9 13, 9 15, AND NINE 17 NORTH PINE STREET. NOW THIS PERTAINS TO THE HOUSE THAT'S IN FRONT OF THIS PROJECT RIGHT HERE. THIS HOUSE, UH, 9 0 9 NORTH PINE, UM, IS, UH, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WITHOUT THIS HOUSE BEING THREE FEET IN FRONT OF THE SETBACK LINES, IT WOULDN'T HAVE ALLOWED FOR THE OTHER HOUSES TO BE BUILT. THE FOUR THAT ARE GONNA BE ON THE AGENDA TODAY, AND I BELIEVE THERE'S GONNA BE 16 MORE BEHIND THIS PROJECT. SO I'D LIKE TO READ SOMETHING. OKAY, THIS IS FROM EDWARD HALL TO MONICA SAVINO MAR. MAY 31ST AT NO TIME HAS STAFF RECOMMENDED OR DIRECTED THE APPLICANT TO INSTALL A MEDIAN SETBACK. THIS HAS BEEN THE APPLICANT'S REASONING TO THE COMMISSION IN THE PAST REGARDING SETBACKS THAT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. THIS WAS ALSO ONE OF THEIR FALLBACKS LAST WEEK AT A SITE VISIT. IN ANY CASE, THE MEDIAN WAS NOT, WAS NEITHER RECOMMENDED NOR APPROVED. THIS IS SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT'S GONNA ALLOW THESE OTHER ONES TO BE BUILT, THE OTHER 16 THAT ARE GONNA BEHIND THIS HOUSE. UM, WHAT I REALLY WANT TO SHARE IS THAT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, A LOT OF OUR COMMUNITY FEELS THAT THIS IS BECOMING A TERRAMARK PROJECT NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS NO LONGER A DIGNITY HILL HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THIS IS HOW A LOT OF ITS NEIGHBORS FEEL. WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, BUT WE DO NOT FEEL THAT THE STAFF IS BEING, THAT THE BOARD IS NOT BEING CONSISTENT WITH NEIGHBORHOOD GUIDELINES. ALSO, WE ALSO FEEL THAT TERRAMARK IS BLATANTLY ALLOW TO DO WHAT THEY WANT AND YOU ARE REWARDING THEM WITH DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HEARING ME. THANK YOU. VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE. HELLO, VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, 91 18 FAIRLAND, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. AND I'M SPEAKING FOR THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVED THE FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF TWO 15 SOUTH PINTO. THIS EXQUISITE EXAMPLE OF THE QUEEN ANDAL REMAINS REMARKABLY INTACT AND SHOULD BE PRESERVED TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE SOUTH PINTO AND ONE OF VISTA INTERSECTION. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO. PATTY ZZZ PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. UM, NOW IF WE COULD DRAW OUR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN. UM, WE HAVE 12 ['B' ITEMS CONSENT AGENDA] ITEMS, 12 ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE B CONSENT AGENDA. UM, ITEMS B ONE, B THREE, B 10, AND B 12 ALL HAVE SPEAKERS. UM, EDWARD, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO NOTE THAT ON THE SCREEN, SO B ONE. ALRIGHT, NEW TO SHAREPOINT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS FOR ITEMS B TWO B FOUR THROUGH B NINE AND B 11 AND THAT B, B ONE B THREE AND B 10 AND B 12 B UH, UH, WITHHELD FOR, UH, INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. SECOND, SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAYYY. MOTION PASSES. YOUR HONOR, THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS ONE 18 BOSTON FIVE 16 PIERCE TWO 15 SOUTH PINTO 1500 SAT 31 0 1 ROSE LAWN 1525 MCCULLOUGH [00:50:01] 2 35 MADISON AND 1 0 3 EAST ATCH. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AN EMAIL TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. IF YOU HAVE NOT YET RETURNED THE PUBLIC NOTICE, YARD SIGNED, PLACED ON YOUR PROPERTY, PLEASE DO SO WITH THE O H P COUNTER ON THE FIRST FLOOR. HEY, YOU, UM, ITEM [B-1 20-2077 Address/Description: 315 GROVE AVE/115 BOSTON HDRC Case No.: 2020-051 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Robert Lee/LindLee,LLC Request: Construction of a 1-story, single family residential structure City Council Dist.: 5] B ONE IS ONE 15 BOSTON. UM, WE HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED IN, JOSEPH GARCIA. HELLO, UM, JOSEPH GARCIA, 9 0 6 EAST CROCKETT STREET. WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR COMMENTS FOR THE FOLLOWING CASES IN OUR HISTORICAL DISTRICT. THIS IS FOR ONE 15 BOSTON. WE SUPPORT O HP'S RECOMMENDATIONS. WE RECOMMEND THAT THE APPLICANT INCLUDE WINDOWS ON THE NORTH ELEVATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COSA HISTORIC GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION SECTION TWO CI WINDOWS AND DOOR OPENING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. YOU THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE? YES. HELLO, MY NAME IS ROBERT LEE WITH LINLEY DESIGN BUILD, UH, SPEAKING ON, UH, ONE 15 BOSTON PROPER. I'M SORRY. OH, I WAS, I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT. I WAS JUST GONNA CONFIRM THAT YOU'RE OKAY WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS? YES. UM, I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO A APPROVE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. THANK YOU CHAIRMAN. BEFORE THEY, UM, ON THAT, CAN, UH, THE APPLICANT MAKE A COMMENT ON THE, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVE'S, UH, REQUEST FOR, UH, WINDOWS ON THE NORTH FACADE OF THE BUILDING. IS THAT POSSIBLE GIVEN THE, THE WHATEVER THE USE OR PROGRAM IS FOR THE INTERIOR? YES. AND UH, UPDATES HAVE BEEN MADE. I'VE BEEN IN, UH, NEGOTIATION AND DISCUSSION WITH THE OFFICE OF O H P AND, UH, WINDOW WAS ADDED TO THE NORTH F FACADE, WHICH IS A, UH, A NON-PRIMARY FACADE. BUT WE DID GO AHEAD AND, AND ADD THAT IT'S TO THE SIDE YARD OR REAR YARD AND, UH, POTENTIALLY A FUTURE PARKING SPACE. BUT WE DID GO AHEAD AND ADD THAT, THAT, UH, WINDOW. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WAS A SECOND. AYE, QUEZ. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THIS CLARIFICATION, THIS IS FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. UM, ITEM [B-3 20-2089 Address/Description: 814 BURNET ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-055 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Gaspar Rivera/POMA PROPERTIES LLC Request: Re-issue of Certificate of Appropriateness for new construction City Council Dist.: 2] B THREE. UM, ADDRESS IS EIGHT 14 BURNETT. UM, WE HAVE A SPEAKER FOR THIS CASE AS WELL. JOSEPH GARCIA. JOSEPH GARCIA, 9 0 6 EAST CROCKETT STREET FOR EIGHT 14 BURNETT. WE SUPPORT O P'S RECOMMENDATION. ARE HAPPY TO SEE THE APPLICANT RESTART THIS PROJECT AND BEGIN TO, UM, MITIGATE THE LONG STANDING SAFETY CONCERNS ON HIS JOB SITE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SEE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. HI, GASPA RIVER OWNER OF THE PROJECT FOR EIGHT 14 BURNETT. UH, AND YOU AGREE WITH ALL OF STAFF STIPULATIONS? YES. THE ITEM WAS IN CONSENT LIST AND WE'VE AGREED WITH ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE EVEN HAVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR TO, UH, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. MOTION A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAME NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. A COMMENT MAY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF THEY'RE IN SUPPORT, WE DON'T NEED TO PULL THE ITEMS FROM CONSENT. I MEAN, THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN PULLED, BUT JUST FOR FUTURES 'CAUSE. RIGHT. THAT IS OUR POLICY. UM, MR. GARCIA CHECKED OPPOSITION ON THE SIGN-IN SHEET AND SO THAT'S WHY THEY WERE PULLED. UM, UM, ITEM [B-10 20-2166 Address/Description: 515 WICKES HDRC Case No.: 2020-045 Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Rebecca Clausewitz/CLAUSEWITZ REBECCA Request: Construction of a 2-story rear addition, construction of a 1-story rear accessory structure, exterior alterations, window replacement, site modifications City Council Dist.: 1] B TEN FIVE FIFTEEN WIX. UM, WE HAVE A SPEAKER FOR THIS CASE. LISA LIND. LISA LIND, 1 22 MADISON KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION. DEAR COMMISSIONERS, [00:55:01] THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND CONCUR WITH STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WITH ALL STIPULATIONS FOR APPROVAL. WE REQUEST THAT ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS BE ATTACHED TO THE BASIS FOR APPROVAL. NUMBER ONE, PROVIDE DRAWINGS THAT ILLUSTRATE THE DESIGN FOR THE PROPOSED GARAGE STRUCTURE. NUMBER TWO, PROVIDE A FLOOR PLAN OF THE EXISTING HOUSE. NUMBER THREE, TO PROVIDE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN OLD AND NEW SET. THE SIDE EXTERIOR WALL BACK AT THE JUNCTURE BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND THE PROPOSED EDITION, WHICH WOULD BE LOCATED NEAR THE PROPOSED WINDOW OVER THE KITCHEN SINK. THE SETBACK PLANE SHOULD CARRY UP THROUGH THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS REBECCA CLAUSEWITZ AND I'M HERE FOR 5 1 5 WICKS. UM, TWO QUESTIONS. UH, YOU AGREE WITH ALL OF STAFF STIPULATIONS? UM, YES. UH, A LOT OF THIS IS GONNA BE TO BE DETERMINED WHEN, UM, THE REMOVAL OF THE VINYL SIDING COMES OFF THE HOUSE. UH, IN TERMS OF WHAT CAN BE SAVED, WHAT CAN'T BE SAVED, UM, A LOT IS UNKNOWN AT THIS POINT. UM, SO, UM, I WOULD SAY YES, BUT STILL TO BE DETERMINED. UM, ONCE, UM, UH, REHABILITATION STARTS. SO THIS IS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, CORRECT? UM, CAN THE APPLICANT REMOVE SIGHTING WITHOUT APPROVAL? YES. CORRECT. SO NO, A CERTIFICATE IS NEEDED TO REMOVE THE, THE VINYL SITE EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT ORIGINAL, WE REQUIRE THAT. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO FINAL AND THEN GET, UH, IT'S ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. OKAY. SO THEY CAN DO SOME EXPLORATORY, UH, SELECTIVE REMOVAL TO SEE WHAT THE CONDITION MIGHT BE UNDERNEATH? ABSOLUTELY. THAT WE DO THAT QUITE ROUTINELY. NOT KNOWING THE CONDITION OF THE HOME. I'M REALLY HESITANT TO REMOVE A PROTECTIVE LAYER AT THIS POINT WITHOUT HAVING APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD FROM THAT POINT. SO THAT'S THE REASON I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING, UM, AT THIS POINT WITH THE VINYL SIDING. OKAY. AND THEN, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S COMMENTS, UH, ANY RESPONSE TO THOSE? UM, RIGHT, THIS IS THE FIRST I'M HEARING OF IT, SO I REALLY WOULD LIKE, UM, UM, A WRITTEN FORM, UM, OF THE COMMENTS TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THEM. UH, I AGREE. BEFORE THE, UM, GARAGE, IF AND WHEN THE GARAGE IS CONSTRUCTED, BECAUSE THIS IS GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, IF BUILDING FUNDS PERMIT A GARAGE WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, UM, I AGREE TO PROVIDE THOSE, UH, PLANS IN ADVANCE FOR APPROVAL. UM, UH, I'M HESITANT TO PROVIDE A, A FLOOR PLAN, UM, THAT SEEMS, UH, VERY INTRUSIVE TO BE HONEST. UM, UH, HAVING SOMEBODY KNOW THE LAYOUT OF MY HOME SEEMS VERY INTRUSIVE, BUT I WOULD DO IT, UH, HESITANTLY, I MAY ADD. UM, BUT THE REST OF IT, UH, DIDN'T SEEM PROBLEMATIC BASED ON WHAT I'VE JUST HEARD, ALTHOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT IN WRITING JUST TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT WAS SAID. AND I, I, I THINK JUST TO CLARIFY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE LOOKING AT, UH, THE EXISTING HOUSE PLAN. WE, WE HAVE THE PLAN FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, SO I THINK THEY'RE JUST WANTING TO MAKE SURE WE GET DOCUMENTATION ON WHAT'S EXISTING. OKAY. THAT CAN BE PROVIDED FOR SURE. UM, I, I THOUGHT THAT SHE WAS REFERRING TO THE ADDITION AND, AND THE WAY THAT IT'S GONNA BE MODIFIED. I THINK JUST COMMUNICATION WITH NEIGHBORHOOD IZATION IS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WE RECOMMEND ON THE SIDE. I MEAN, WE DON'T REQUIRE FULL PEN FLOOR PLANS, SO, RIGHT. UM, IF YOU AGREE WITH ALL THE STIPULATIONS, AND SINCE THIS IS CONCEPTUAL AND I THINK THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN GO GET A X CERTIFICATE JUST ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE THE SIDING TO REMOVE THAT, I THINK YOU'RE GONNA COME BACK ANYWAY. RIGHT. I FEEL CONFIDENT. I MEAN, APPROVING WITH ALL THE STIPULATIONS, JUST KEEPING COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF AND IF THERE'S ANY DOUBT BEFORE DOING ANYTHING, ALWAYS COME TO US. RIGHT. AND THAT, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I, UH, PLAN TO DO. I JUST, AT THIS POINT, A LOT OF IT IS UNKNOWN BECAUSE, UM, UH, I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT'S THERE. UM, AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I SAID I, I AGREE WITH WHAT THEY SAID, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FINAL OUTCOME IS GONNA BE. DOES THE STAFF HAVE THOSE ADDITIONAL FOUR STIPULATIONS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOCUMENTED? YEAH, THEY'RE IN A LETTER THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO US TODAY. OKAY. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD FOR FINAL APPROVAL, THAT WE STILL HAVE RECORD OF THOSE. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND WITH THE THREE, I THOUGHT THERE WERE THREE ADDITIONAL, UH, STIPULATIONS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH INCLUDED DRAWINGS OF THE GARAGE, UH, FLOOR PLAN, [01:00:01] A UH, DRAWING OF THE EXISTING FLOOR PLAN OF THE HOUSE, AND THEN DEVELOPING A DISTINCTION BETWEEN OLD AND NEW, UH, THROUGH THE DETAILING. UH, FOR THE FINAL APPROVAL. I, I BASICALLY JUST SPLIT THAT INTO FIRST STORY AND SECOND STORY IS WHEN SHE SAID TO CARRY IT THROUGH. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE SAME THING. THAT'S WHAT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, THE [B-12 20-2093 Address/Description: 728 CHESTNUT ST/204 HAYS HDRC Case No.: 2019-553 Applicant: Adam Gates/Adam Word Gates - Architect Request: Construction of three, 3-story residential structures City Council Dist.: 2] LAST CASE PULLED FROM CONSENT IS, UM, 7 28 CHESTNUT ITEM B 12. UM, THE SPEAKER IS, UH, VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE AND I LIVE AT 91 18 FAIRLAND HERE IN SAN ANTONIO AND I REPRESENT THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO OPPOSES THE APPLICATION FOR THREE NEW 38 FOOT HIGH BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO THE HAYES STREET BRIDGE. THE SOCIETY SPENT 50,000 TO HELP RESTORE THE BRIDGE OVER A DECADE AGO AND HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN EFFORTS TO PRESERVE VIEWS TO AND FROM THE BRIDGE. THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL RISE ABOVE THE BRIDGE HEIGHT AND BLOCK VIEWS OF DOWNTOWN FROM THE RAMP AT THE WEST END OF THE BRIDGE. ALL OF THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL STRUCTURES DEPICTED IN THE APPLICATION ARE NO MORE THAN TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT. MOREOVER, THE ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE NEW STRUCTURES BEAR NO RELATIONSHIP TO THE SCALE MASSING OR MATERIALS OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES. THEY'RE OUT OF PLACE. THIS PROJECT UNDERSCORES THE NEED FOR VIEW SHED PROTECTION. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THE CONSERVATION OF SAN ANTONIO, PATTY ZZ, PRESIDENT AND JOSEPH GARCIA. I'M SORRY, WE, WE DON'T HAVE, UM, ANY, UM, COMMENTS ON THIS ONE. I'M SO SORRY. SORRY, SORRY. UM, THAT'S ALL WE HAVE SIGNED IN. IS THERE AN APPLICANT WHO CAN REPRESENT THIS PROJECT? ADAM GATES MAY WANT TO CONTINUE THIS ONE. UH, THE APPLICANT CAN RESPOND, YES. MR. CHAIRMAN, IN UH, KEEPING WITH OUR TRADITION OF SETTING ASIDE THOSE, UH, PROJECTS THAT DON'T HAVE AN APPLICANT PRESENT, I MOVE FOR A CONTINUANCE UNTIL OUR NEXT HEARING. SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. I'LL OPPOSE SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. UM, COMMISSIONERS, I'M GONNA GO OFF SCRIPT A LITTLE BIT HERE. UM, WE HAVE TWO ITEMS, UM, ON THE INDIVIDUAL AGENDA WHERE THE APPLICANT HAS CONSENTED TO STAFF STIPULATIONS. UM, AND SO WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT THOSE BE MOVED UP SO WE CAN QUICKLY APPROVE THEM BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE REMAINDER OF THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS. UM, SO THE [B-22 20-2097 Address/Description: 607 DAWSON ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-057 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Neil Shillig/SHILLIG CARTER NEAL & SHILLIG BONNIE J & DEARING JOSEPH Request: Construction of a 1-story, single family residential structure City Council Dist.: 2] FIRST IS B 22 6 0 7 DAWSON. UM, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO STIPULATIONS AND WE DON'T HAVE PUBLIC SPEAKER FOR THAT ONE. HAVE, UH, SOMEONE SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? UH, MR. GARCIA SIGNED IN, UM, BUT IF THEY'RE AGREEING TO STAFF STIPULATIONS, HE SAID HE DOESN'T NEED TO SPEAK ON IT. MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. MOTION IS SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. UM, AND NEXT IS [B-24 20-2106 Address/Description: 802 NOLAN HDRC Case No.: 2020-065 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Jenny Hernandez Request: Landscaping and fencing City Council Dist.: 2] ITEM B 24. 8 0 2. 8 0 2 NOLAN STREET. UM, THE APPLICANT HAS CONSENTED TO STAFF STIPULATIONS. UM, MR. GARCIA ALSO SIGNED IN FOR THAT, UM, BUT DOES NOT NEED TO SPEAK IF THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED. STAFF STIPULATION. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND. AYE AYE. AYE. I'LL OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU FOR BEARING WITH ME. WE WANTED TO GET THOSE APPLICANTS OUT OF HERE IF THEY WERE IN AGREEMENT. UM, [B-13 20-2192 Address/Description: 911 N PINE ST 913 N PINE ST 915 N PINE ST 917 N PINE ST HDRC Case No.: 2019-699 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Ricardo Turrubiates/Terramark Request: Construction of two, 2-story mixed-use structures City Council Dist.: 2] SO THAT'LL BRING US TO ITEM B 13 EDWARD CHAIRMAN, I RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS CASE. AGENDA ITEM B 13 H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 19 6 9 9 9 11 9 13 9 15 AND NINE 17 NORTH PINE STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT TWO TWO STORY MIXED USE STRUCTURES [01:05:01] ON THE VACANT LOTS ADDRESS AS 9 11 9 13 9 15 AND NINE 17 NORTH PINE. THE LOTS DO NOT FRONT A PUBLIC STREET BUT FRONT A PRIVATE DRIVE THAT FEATURES ACCESS TO NORTH PINE TO THE IMMEDIATE SOUTH OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION LOCATED AT 9 0 9. NORTH PINE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL AT THIS TIME. WHILE THE APPLICANT HAS MODIFIED VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION STAFF FINDS THAT THERE ARE ELEMENTS THAT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS PRIOR TO RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. ONE THAT THE APPLICANT CONTINUE TO DEVELOP ENTRANCES THAT FEATURE ELEMENTS THAT REFERENCE THOSE FOUND TRADITIONALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES IN REGARDS TO APPROPRIATE FOUNDATION HEIGHTS. THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED ROOF FORMS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AND THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT FOUR THAT THE APPLICANT IMPLEMENT WINDOW AND DOOR OPENINGS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AND WITH THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT AS THE DESIGN PROGRESSES. FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED MATERIALS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AND THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT STIPULATION. SIX IS IN REGARDS TO STAFF'S WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS AND SEVEN THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED PARKING THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AND DOES NOT RESULT IN A FRONT YARD PARKING CONDITION IS NOTED IN FINDING. YES. WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT UP AT THIS TIME, UH, TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION AND THEN WE HAVE A FEW SPEAKERS SIGNED IN. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M PLEASED TO, UH, BE HERE IN FRONT OF THE, UH, COMMISSION TODAY. UH, MANY OF YOU KNOW THAT WE'VE, UH, BEEN HERE A COUPLE TIMES, UH, WORKING ON THIS PROJECT. UH, AND, UH, EXCUSE ME, WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF, PLEASE? OH, I'M SORRY. CHARLES TURNER, C E O OF TERRAMARK URBAN HOMES. UH, CONTINUING. UH, THE PACKAGE THAT WE'VE PROVIDED IS A PACKAGE THAT'S BEEN THE CULMINATION OF, OF MANY MEETINGS WITH THE H D R C. I THINK WE'VE HAD FOUR OR FIVE OF THOSE, MANY OF YOU HAVE ATTENDED THOSE. UH, ONE OF THOSE INCLUDE THE SITE VISIT TO THE PROPERTY ITSELF, SO THEY COULD SEE THE, THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS IT RELATES TO, UH, THE, THE BUILDING THAT THESE WILL BE FACING, WHICH IS OUR OFFICE BUILDING FOR OUR COMPANY. UH, THIS IS, UH, LOCATED AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE INFORMATION, UH, IN AN AREA OF, OF, UH, DIGNITY WHERE WE WERE REZONED WITH THE ABILITY TO DO COMMERCIAL, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AS WELL AS LIVE WORK AND ALSO RESIDENTIAL. SO THIS MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY OF, OF, OF PROPERTY, UH, WHICH JUST IS ONE LITTLE PORTION OF THAT, THESE FOUR LOTS. UH, AS, UH, ED SAID, UH, THEY DO NOT FACE, UH, PINE STREET, THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN INTERNAL TO THE PROPERTY AND THE CONTEXT THAT WE DERIVED ALL OF OUR, UH, IDEAS AND, UH, CONCEPTUAL IDEAS. AND AGAIN, WE'RE HERE FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. UH, MANY OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT, UH, WE WOULD ACTUALLY AGREE TO WITH ED WOULD BE COMING OUT IN THE FINAL, UH, PLANS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA PROPOSE. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF FINAL DOOR FENESTRATIONS AND DOOR AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO TODAY AND WHAT WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING WITH THE D R C AND MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION, UH, TO DO, IS TO BRING TOGETHER A PROJECT THAT, UH, IS, IS WE STARTED WITH FOUR UNITS, AND NOW IT'S TWO, TWO STRUCTURES. UH, WE COMBINED, UH, TWO OF THE UNITS TO, TO EACH OTHER AND END UP, UH, PICKING UP MORE GREEN SPACE AND OPEN SPACE. UH, WE'VE ALSO BEEN VERY, VERY SENSITIVE TO THE WAY THE PROPERTY IS CITED. IT'S, IT'S, UH, CURRENTLY WOULD BE DEVELOPED ON AN EXISTING PARKING LOT THAT WAS PART OF THE CHURCH, ORIGINAL CHURCH. THERE WAS A LOT OF HISTORY AND STUFF. I WON'T GO INTO ALL THAT, UH, BUT, UH, BUT, UH, WE ARE ACTUALLY TAKING ALL THE INSPIRATION FROM OUR OFFICE BUILDING, WHICH IS THERE. AND THE IDEA IS THAT AS YOU COME IN, THIS IS A, IS THE COMPLETING THE PORTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. UH, SO THESE ARE NOT RESIDENTIAL HOMES PER SE, UH, LIKE YOU MIGHT NORMALLY SEE, BUT IT'S A QUITE DIFFERENT USE, WHICH, UH, HAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEBODY TO ACTUALLY OWN, OWN A UNIT, AND, UM, BE ABLE TO HAVE THEIR RESIDENTS THERE AS WELL AS HAVE THEIR PERSONAL OFFICE OR STUDIO OR BUSINESS OR SOMETHING THERE AS WELL. SO IT'S REALLY A, IT'S A PRETTY NEAT LITTLE CONCEPT THAT I THINK WOULD BE, UH, WELL, UH, WELL FOR THE COMMUNITY AS AND SO FORTH. AND SO, UM, SO I'M HERE TO, TO DISCUSS, UH, THE, UH, THE PROJECT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. UH, WE HAVE ADDRESSED THE PARKING, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS AND THE REASONS FOR, UH, THE STAFF'S DENIAL WAS, YOU KNOW, TO ALLEVIATE THE PARKING, WE ORIGINALLY STARTED WITH TWO PARKING SPACES IN FRONT OF EVERY UNIT. WE'VE, UH, UH, BASED UPON SOME COLLABORATION AND, AND SOME REALLY GOOD IDEAS THAT COME OUT, THAT CAME OUT OF THE, UH, THE D R C MEETINGS, UH, BY COMBINING THE UNITS AND RESHAPING 'EM AND RECONFIGURING THEM, WE WERE ABLE TO PUT IN SIDE PARKING ALONG THE, THE, UH, THE UNITS, WHICH, WHICH ALLOWED MORE GREEN SPACE IN FRONT OPEN SPACE, AND REALLY, UH, CREATE [01:10:01] A NICE ENVIRONMENT FOR, UH, UH, FOR THE PROJECT. UH, SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE ADDRESSED, UH, ONE OF THE, UH, THE CONCERNS THAT THE STAFF HAD ABOUT PARKING IN FRONT OF THE, OF THE, UH, OF THE UNITS. UM, AND AS FAR AS THE, THE SCALE, UH, THESE ARE, THESE, THESE PROPERTIES WHICH ARE SITTING ON THESE LOTS, THESE ARE PLATTED LOTS. UH, THE DENSITY OR THE LOT TO BUILDING RATIO IS ONLY ABOUT 35%. I THINK IT'S 32.5 TO BE EXACT, WHICH IS ALSO IN THE PACKAGE. UH, I THINK THE, THE GUIDELINES ARE TRYING, UH, NOT TO EXCEED 50%. SO WE ARE WELL UNDER THE DENSITY, UH, ON A RATIO OF, OF, UH, OF BUILDING TO LAND RATIO. UH, EACH OF THESE UNITS PROVIDE TWO PARKING SPACES SO THAT THERE WON'T BE ANY, WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE, UH, ADVERSE IMPACT ON, ON, UH, ON PARKING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS AND SO FORTH. AND, UH, AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, UH, WE'VE, WE'VE MET WITH PROPERTY OWNERS ADJACENT PROPERTIES ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS. MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND I THINK THERE MAY BE A LETTER THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FORTHCOMING FROM THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, MET WITH THE, THEIR ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMITTEE, UH, UH, AND SHOWED THEM THE PLAN, ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS. THEY HAD VERY POSITIVE, UH, UH, RESPONSE FROM THEM. AND, AND I DON'T KNOW, ED, DID YOU GET A LETTER FROM THEM TODAY? THERE'S A LETTER IN YOUR PACKETS FROM THE DAYTON WOODY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, ON THIS, UH, SUBJECT. AND, UM, IF I'M, I HAVEN'T SEEN THE LETTER, SO I DON'T KNOW, UH, IF YOU'RE GONNA READ THAT LETTER OR NOT. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN READ? OKAY. FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS A LETTER FROM THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UM, THEIR H PARK OR THEIR HISTORIC PRESERVATION ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S HISTORIC PRESERVATION ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY RICARDO ES WITH TERRAMARK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO, TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. UPON REVIEW, THE H PARK SUPPORTS THE PROJECT AS PRESENTED, WHICH INCLUDES THE ROOF DESIGNS THAT ALLOW FOR DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE NEAREST PROPERTY. THE H PARK WOULD LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE APPLICANT'S OUTREACH TO THE COMMITTEE AND TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS OF THE PROJECT. ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS A LETTER FROM THE, UH, DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I, I HAVE A COMMENT FOR, FOR STAFF OR QUESTION. UM, LOOKING AT THE PRESENTATION THAT'S BEEN GIVEN TO US, IT, IT'S CONCEPTUAL AND LOOKING AT THE COMMENTS THAT, THAT YOU HAVE, THAT THAT STAFF HAS, THEY'RE BEYOND CONCEPTUAL AS IF, IF WE USE CONCEPTUAL DEFINED BY THE, THE, UH, APPLICANT, I KIND OF FEEL LIKE WE'RE GOING TO, WE'RE GONNA ENTER INTO KIND OF A, A, A REALLY HARDCORE DIALOGUE THAT'S GOING TO REALLY BE SPEAKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS, UM, IN AN EFFORT TO, TO NOT DO THAT. I WANT TO ASK, UM, WOULD, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT, THAT WHAT THEY'RE GIVING US IS PURELY CONCEPTUAL? UH, THERE'S NOT REALLY A WAY TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE HERE. UH, IT SEEMS LIKE, LIKE THEIR PERSPECTIVE WOULD BE THAT THEY WOULD COME BACK AND, AND THEY WOULD HAVE DESIGN OF THEIR, OF THEIR WINDOWS AND THEIR DOORS AND THE HEIGHT OF THEIR FOUNDATIONS AND THE ROOF SLOPES AND ALL OF THAT. UM, I MEAN, WOULD, WOULD YOU THINK IT WOULD BE REASONABLE FOR US TO CONSIDER THAT, THAT AS CONCEPTUAL? THAT, THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THE LITERAL, UH, YOU KNOW, CONCEPTUAL, NOT, NOT LIKE A TYPICAL CASE THAT COMES BEFORE US WHERE SOMEONE'S GOT A HOUSE THAT EXISTS ALREADY AND CONCEPTUAL FOR THEM MEANS, LIKE IT'S ALL REALLY ALMOST DONE, YOU KNOW? YEAH. FIND FINDING B UM, IN, IN STAFF'S REPORT ADDRESSES CONCEPTUAL REVIEW. UH, AND SO FINDING B READS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL IS THE REVIEW OF GENERAL DESIGN IDEAS AND PRINCIPLES SUCH AS SCALE AND SETBACK. SPECIFIC DESIGN DETAILS REVIEWED AT THIS STAGE ARE NOT BINDING AND MAY ONLY BE APPROVED THROUGH A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR FINAL APPROVAL. UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS SIMPLY THAT A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION. UM, WE SIMPLY WANT THE APPLICANT TO BE AWARE, UM, OF COMMENTS THAT THEY'LL RECEIVE IN THE FUTURE, UM, THAT WAY THEY CAN, AS THEY MOVE FROM CONCEPTUAL DESIGN INTO CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, BE AWARE OF VARIOUS MATERIALS OR ARCHITECTURAL FORMS THAT STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF. UM, OBVIOUSLY THE COMMISSION HAS THE ABILITY TO CONSIDER, UM, WHICH OF STAFF'S STIPULATIONS OR PARTS OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER. WELL, AND JUST, JUST, UH, COMMENT TO Y ALL I I I, I AGREE WITH YOUR, WITH, UH, WITH, WITH THE COMMENTS AND THE, THE FINDINGS AND ALL OF [01:15:01] THAT. I JUST, I'M WORRIED THAT WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TWO DIFFERENT DIALOGUES. UM, AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S, UH, COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT NEED TO BE MADE, BUT I THINK THEY'RE GONNA GIVE A BIG PRESENTATION, BUT WE'RE STILL GONNA BE TALKING, YOU KNOW, APPLES AND ORANGES. AND I THINK THEIR APPLES ARE PROBABLY, THEY'RE PROBABLY ON MORE ON POINT WITH WHAT WE HOPE CONCEPTUAL LOOKS LIKE WHEN OTHER CONCEPTUAL, UH, UH, REQUESTS COMING BEFORE US. RIGHT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF COMMISSIONERS AGREE, BUT, WELL, I I THINK THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD VERY CLEARLY SEE ARE, ARE STANDARD COMMENTS THAT ARE FOR YOUR BENEFIT, THAT ARE FOR YOUR NEXT ROUND OF THINGS. THERE'S A COUPLE THAT I THINK SPEAK TO CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, ROOF FORMS, PORCH DYNAMICS, UM, THE, UH, MATERIALS, THE MATERIAL CHOICES. YOU'RE SHOWING SOME MATERIALS ON THESE BUILDINGS AS TO WHAT THOSE MATERIALS ARE. I THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING IMPORTANT FOR US TO TALK ABOUT. AND THE FRONT YARD PARKING CONDITION, ALL OF WHICH, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY ADDRESS, SCALE, UM, SITE LAYOUT, THE THINGS THAT WE'RE REALLY GONNA BE CONSIDERED WITHIN THIS MEETING. SO, I AGREE, I DON'T WANNA MAKE, UM, ANY DETAILED ASSESSMENTS THAT AREN'T REALLY VALID FOR TODAY, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS THAT ARE, UM, APPROPRIATE TO THE SCALE AND, AND THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED HERE IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS. AND, AND SOMETIMES SOME APPLICANTS USE CONCEPTUAL JUST TO GET, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT MOVING FORWARD WITH ALREADY WITH, UM, SOMEWHAT JUST A CONCEPTUAL IN CASE THEY WANNA ACTUALLY GO FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT. AND WE ARE FAMILIAR WITH THIS DEVELOPER. WE'VE HAD SO MANY DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEES THAT WE KNOW HE'S GONNA MOVE FORWARD. SO ANYTHING THAT WE DISCUSS TODAY IS ONLY GONNA HELP THE FINAL MOVE CLOSER AND FASTER. SO WE MAY GO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ONLY CONCEPTUAL, BUT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH A LOT OF DETAILS THAT WILL BE TALKED ABOUT AT FINAL, THAT HE'S ALREADY TAKEN INTO CONSERVATION. WE ALREADY KNOW THAT THIS IS GONNA GO FOR FINAL WITH THE SAME DEVELOPER. THIS IS A DEVELOPER THAT'S DONE SEVERAL PROJECTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I THINK THIS PROJECT SPECIFICALLY IS A LITTLE BIT SPECIAL. SO I DO FEEL LIKE, I DO FEEL LIKE IT NEEDS THE DISCUSSION. UM, THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. WE'VE ALSO DONE A SITE VISIT. IT'S ONLY FOR CONCEPTUAL, WHICH, YES, IT'S A LOT OF MEETINGS FOR ONLY CONCEPTUAL BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A, A PROJECT THAT NEEDS THAT ATTENTION. AND, AND I, I APPRECIATE THAT. MY COMMENTS, UH, JUST, JUST PUT 'EM IN THE PROPER CONTEXT WHERE IN THE SENSE THAT STAFF IS BEING VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THE, THE DETAILS THAT ARE MORE CLOSE TO FINAL. UM, AND JUST THAT WE'RE ALL SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE. I APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS AND, AND, AND THE, THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS. I'M SURE WE'RE VERY INFORMATIVE AS WELL. SO, UH, THIS TIME WE'LL HEAR CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. NICHOLAS SPIKER READINGS, COMMISSIONERS, NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN. IT'S BEEN A COUPLE MONTHS. UM, I JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU WITH ALL THIS TALK ABOUT CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, UM, THEY ALL, UH, TERRAMARK HASN'T ALWAYS STUCK TO WHAT'S BEEN RECOMMENDED BY O H P, SO I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO GET A LOT OF DETAILS. UM, I ALSO WANNA REMIND YOU ON H P A R C, THE LETTER THAT YOU JUST READ, THAT'S TWO INDIVIDUALS. I WANNA SHOW THIS MAP AGAIN, WHICH SHOWS 65 SIGNATURES IN OPPOSITION OF THIS BUILD. THOSE ARE ALL THE BLUE DOTS. THIS IS ON THE, THE BLOCK, THE LOCAL BLOCK. OH, DOES THIS MOVE IT? IT'S NOT, OH, GOTCHA, GOTCHA. OKAY. UH, THIS IS A REMINDER OF SOME OF THE REASONS WHY, UM, AND THIS IS, THIS IS DIRECTLY FROM THE NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA. THIS, I WANTED THE REMINDER OF THE DRAINAGE ISSUES, WHICH SOME OF YOU DID SEE, UM, DURING THE SITE VISIT, UH, 24 TO 36 INCHES OF EROSION ISSUES. UM, YOU SAW THE IMAGE THAT WAS PRESENTED BY TARA MARK ON THE FIRST SLIDE THERE. I, I DO THINK IT'S A SHAME THAT, UH, A HOUSE BUILT IN 1894 IS NOT GOING TO BE VISIBLE ANYMORE, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, IF THESE HOUSES ARE BUILT. UH, I FIND THAT TO BE, UH, IN COMPLETE OPPOSITION OF WHAT THE COMMISSION IS HERE TO DO, TO PROTECT THE NATURE OF, OF HISTORIC HOMES. UH, HERE'S SOME MORE IMAGES OF THE EROSION, THE MEASUREMENT THERE. THIS IS ONE OF MY, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. IT'S, UH, 17 FEET WITH, WITH THE EROSION WE'RE LOOKING, IT'S GONNA BE, THESE BUILDINGS ARE GONNA BE MUCH HIGHER. I MEAN, IT'S GONNA BE CLEARLY VISIBLE. IT'S GONNA BE TOWERING, IT'S GONNA BE A WALL ON THIS WHOLE PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO A HOUSE THAT'S VERY HISTORICAL, OVER A HUNDRED YEARS OLD. UH, HERE'S A, UH, I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT NOW, V V VISION FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THIS IS FROM OLIVE. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE HOMES FROM OLIVE. THIS IS FROM LAMAR. YOU CAN SEE [01:20:01] THE LITTLE, UM, BLUE ROOF THERE IN THE BACKGROUND. THAT'S MY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE HOUSES, HOUSES FROM HERE. UH, THIS IS FROM HAYES. YOU'LL CLEARLY BE ABLE TO SEE THEM FROM HAYES. UM, I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION, YEAH, THESE ARE NOT FACING, UH, A STREET. SO THESE ARE FACING A PRIVATE DRIVE. UM, AND THEY DID, UH, THE D R C RECOMMENDED SOME PARKING RECOMMENDATIONS. THEY DID MAKE SOME CHANGES. UH, ONE THING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE TRASH CANS COMING OUT INTO THE STREET, WHICH WILL LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT WE AS COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE ON THE STREET. UH, HERE'S ANOTHER IMAGE JUST SHOWING WHERE VISIBILITY WILL BE SEEN FROM HAYES GOING OVER SOME OF THE REASONS, AGAIN, DRAINAGE ISSUES. UH, THIS IS BRAND NEW CONSTRUCTION, TOTALLY BEARING, UH, HISTORICAL STRUCTURE VISIBILITY FROM EVERY STREET, UH, WHICH IS DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE GUIDELINES. THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, DOES NOT CONFORM WITH HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. UH, THESE LOOK VERY INDUSTRIAL. THESE WILL BE COMMERCIAL. AND THIS IS A COMMERCIAL SECTOR RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL BLOCK. UH, I DO WANT BUSINESSES TO COME TO DIGNITY HILL, BUT I WANT THEM TO BE IN THE RIGHT AREAS, THE RIGHT LOCATION. ALSO, WE HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT THESE BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE. YOU KNOW, I LIVE WITHIN 12 FEET OF THESE BUILDINGS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA COME IN THERE. UH, SO OBVIOUSLY I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. UH, AND I HOPE THAT YOU DENY THE APPLICATION ON THESE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU, VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE. HELLO, MY NAME IS VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE, AND I LIVE AT 91 18 FAIRLAND SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. AND I'M SPEAKING FOR THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO. CONCURS WITH THE O H P STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL OF THIS PROJECT BASED ON ITEMS ONE THROUGH SEVEN NOT BEING ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT. THE LOT SIZES OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING LOT SIZES WITHIN THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPOSED INTRODUCTION OF CONTEMPORARY DESIGN ELEMENTS, SUCH AS CANTILEVERED PLAINS AND FLAT ROOFS IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES. VOCABULARY FOUND WITHIN THIS AREA, RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO PET DESIGN PRESIDENT. THAT'S ALL WE HAVE. THANK YOU. YES. JOSEPH GARCIA, I APOLOGIZE. HELLO, JOSEPH GARCIA, 9 0 6 EAST'S CROCKETT STREET. WE SUPPORT O HP'S RECOMMENDATION. WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE COMMISSIONERS TO CONSIDER THAT EVEN THOUGH THE BUILDINGS FACE A PRIVATE DRIVE, THEY'RE VISIBLY, UM, THEY'RE VISIBLY FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IS GREAT. AND THE PROJECT SHOULD, UH, A SHOULD APPLY THE GUIDELINES FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES IN A HISTORICAL DISTRICT. WHAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE IS THAT THE, THE LETTER THAT YOU GOT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PLAINLY SAID THAT IT WAS RESIDENTIAL. WHEN WE WERE AT THE MEETING, WHEN WE WERE CAREMARK, AND I BELIEVE THE, UM, THE YOUNG LADY, MS. ANNE, BROUGHT UP A VERY KEY ISSUE, AND I BELIEVE THIS IS WHAT THE GENTLEMAN WAS TALKING ABOUT. THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES HERE. FROM WHAT I, WE UNDERSTAND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND CITY GUIDELINES THAT THERE, IT, IT EITHER HAS TO BE A RESIDENTIAL OR IT'S GOTTA BE COMMERCIAL. NOW YOU'RE PRESENTING THIS AS A WORK LIFT SPACE. I BELIEVE WE DON'T GO AND MAKE THINGS UP AS WE GO. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S WHERE THE TWO ISSUES ARE COMING IN FOR US. UM, WE ALSO STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT IF, YOU KNOW TERRAMARK, THEY NEVER STICK TO THEIR CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS, AND THEY ALWAYS CHANGE THINGS UP. HENCE, THE FIRST HOUSE THAT I SPOKE TO AT 9 0 9, JUST THE SIMPLICITY OF THE, UM, CEMENT BRICK, UM, BLOCKS THAT THEY USE TO DO THEIR LANDSCAPING, TO, UH, CAMOUFLAGE THE SETBACK THAT WAS SET UP THREE FEET IN FRONT OF THE SETBACK. WHAT I'M REALLY HERE TO DO IS TO BE HERE FOR NICHOLAS BIKER, THE MAN THAT LIVES AND OWNS THE PROPERTY AT NINE 19 NORTH PINE STREET. DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS PROJECT, HE WILL BE HAVING A 70 FOOT WALL LEADING DOWN FROM RAIN IN AN EIGHT FOOT ALLEYWAY, BECAUSE THAT'S GONNA BE THE SPACE DIRECTLY BETWEEN HIS HI, HIS HOUSE AND THIS PROJECT WHEN WE WERE THERE. I REMEMBER SPEAKING, NOT SPEAKING, LISTENING TO SCOTT CARPENTER, THAT EXCUSED HIMSELF AND NICHOLAS HAVING A CONVERSATION THAT THERE REALLY NEEDS TO BE A [01:25:01] RETAINING WALL TO PROTECT NOT ONLY HIS PROPERTY, BUT EVERYBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY THERE BECAUSE OF SUCH THE BADGE REIGNING ISSUE. ALSO, THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE AT OUR MEETING THAT WE JUST HAD AT YOUR LAST ONSITE VISIT, YOU ALL CONCURRED TO THAT. AND I'M REALLY GRATEFUL THAT YOU BROUGHT THOSE UP AND YOU DID MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON, UH, THE DRAINING ISSUES THERE. BUT I STRONGLY WOULD RECOMMEND, AND WE WOULD BE INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL AS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU CONSIDER OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FIRST, AND WE PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THE TRUE INVESTORS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED THERE, THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN PAYING TAXES THERE. SO THANK YOU FOR ALL LISTENING TO US TODAY, AND, UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW IT'S ALL WE HAVE TURNER. I AM HERE TO, UH, AGAIN, CHARLIE TURNER, TERRAMARK URBAN HOMES, C E O. UM, I'M HERE TO ADDRESS ANY COMMENTS THAT YOU MAY HAVE HEARD THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE WE CLEAR THE RECORD. IF THERE'S SOME COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN BEEN HEARD OR SPOKEN TODAY, I, I CAN GO THROUGH THEM AND JUST TELL YOU THE THINGS THAT ARE NOT ACCURATE, UH, BUT I MIGHT NOT NEED TO GO THERE IF WE JUST NEED TO TALK ABOUT CONCERNS YOU HAD. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS, THAT WE HAVE DEALT WITH IS THE DRAINAGE ISSUE, WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT. THIS IS AN EXISTING CONDITION THAT, UH, THE GENTLEMAN NEXT TO US WHEN HE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, HAS BEEN EXISTING FOR, FROM THE TIME BEFORE, WAY BEFORE WE BE THE PROPERTY, WELL BEFORE WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, UH, FROM THE CHURCH. UH, SO THIS IS NOT A NEW CONDITION THAT WE HAVE BROUGHT ON TO, TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IN FACT, EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE DONE AS FAR AS DEVELOPING THIS ENTIRE PROPERTY, UH, THAT WAS THE CHURCH PROPERTY, HAS BEEN REDUCING AND ELIMINATING. AND, AND, AND IN MANY CASES, ELIMINATING THE DIRECTION OF FLOW OF WATER TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, UH, UH, WILL IN FACT CHANGE DRAMATICALLY THE FLOW OF WATER THAT HAS BEEN CURRENTLY AND HAS FOR AS LONG AS HE'S, THAT HOUSE HAS BEEN BUILT HAS BEEN FLOWING ACROSS HIS PROPERTY. THAT'S THE DRAIN, THAT'S THE NATURAL DRAINAGE PROPERTY. AND WE HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE PRESENTED IN THE PAST AND HAVE GONE OVER WITH THE COMMISSIONERS AND, AND THROUGH THE D R C MEETINGS ABOUT THIS, WE WILL BE ACTUALLY TAKING OUT MANY, MUCH, MUCH OF THE PARKING LOT THAT HAS EXISTED THERE FROM WAY BEFORE WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, WHICH SHEET DRAINS AND CARRIES A LOT OF WATER ACROSS, UH, THE GENTLEMAN'S PROPERTY. UH, HE HAS ASKED IF WE WOULD PUT A DETENTION WALL ON OUR PROPERTY. YOU KNOW, HE HAS THE REBUILDING ON HIS PROPERTY TO PUT A DETENTION WALL, IF THAT'S A CONCERN, ALTHOUGH HE'D PROBABLY GET A PERMIT AND NOT BE ABLE TO GET A PERMIT TO DO THAT, UH, JUST BECAUSE HE'D BE BLOCKING OUR PROPERTY. BUT WE'VE ACTUALLY, UH, TOLD HIM THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT OUR DRAINAGE PLAN, UH, VERY THOROUGH DRAINAGE PLAN THAT WE'VE DONE, WE WILL BE ACTUALLY THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF SOME OF THE ROOF STRUCTURES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROPOSE, UH, WHICH ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE BUILDING THAT WE HAVE, WHICH IS ALSO A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS APPROVED BY, BY H D R C AT THE TIME THAT WE REMODELED THAT BUILDING. WE WANT TO TAKE THOSE SAME, UH, CONCEPTS AND INSPIRATION. AND BY HAVING THESE FAIRLY FLAT ROOFS, WE CAN ACTUALLY CATCH ALL THE WATER, CATCH 'EM AND DRAIN PIPES, BRING THEM TO THE FRONT, TO THE FOREFRONT, BRING THEM DOWN THE STREET. BUT ALSO WE'RE GONNA BE DOING LOW IMPACT DRIVEWAYS, WHICH WE'RE CONSISTENT IN DOING. AND THE COMMENT ABOUT US NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS FAR FROM, FROM CORRECT. UH, WE ARE ACTUALLY HAVE TAKEN OUT MUCH OF THE PARKING LOT, WHICH SITS BETWEEN OUR BUILDING AND THE STREET. THAT WAS ALL PARKING LOT. WE'VE REMOVED A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF ASPHALT THERE. THE BUILD ALL THE HOMES THAT WE'VE BUILT AROUND ON HAY STREET AND, UH, PINE STREET. WERE ALSO PARKING LOTS OR THE ENTIRE BUILDING STRUCTURES AND FOUNDATIONS. WE'VE REMOVED ALL THAT AND HAVE MINIMIZED THE AMOUNT OF FLOW THAT WAS REALLY HARDSCAPE FLOWING WATER INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WE'VE REDUCED IT SUBSTANTIALLY. UH, SO, SORRY. I'M SORRY. I WAS, I WAS GONNA SPEAK TO YOUR, UM, YOUR ROOF, UH, DRAINAGE PLAN. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? OKAY. SO, I'M SORRY. GO UP TO, THERE WE GO. OKAY. SO ON THAT BOTTOM DRAWING WE'RE LOOKING AT, THIS IS THE DRAWING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO POINT OUT TO YOU IS THAT THIS ISN'T ACCURATELY DE DEPICTING YOUR ROOF PROFILE. SO YOU'RE MISSING THE FOUR QUADRANTS OF THE TOP TWO QUADRANTS OF EACH BUILDING. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? BECAUSE YOUR SECOND FLOOR EXTENDS ALL THE WAY TO THAT EVE, TO THAT FAR EVE, OH, SORRY. IF YOU GO UP, UH, TO THE, I'M SORRY, DOWN TO THE NEXT PAGE. OKAY. SO YOU SEE THERE THAT [01:30:01] BACK, THAT BACK PLANE IS IN LINE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? UH, YEAH, THAT'S THE FRONT. SO YOU HAVE AN OVER THAT'S THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, CORRECT? NO, ON THE BACK, ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE BUILDING FACING THE ALLEY. IT'S YOU MEAN THE COMMON DRIVE? THAT'S NOT AN ALLEY, THAT'S THE COMMON DRIVE THAT THEY'RE FACING. THEY'RE FACING OUR BUILDING, WHICH IS A COMMON DRIVE BETWEEN OUR BUILDING AND, AND, AND THE BUILDINGS WE'RE PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT. SO EVERYTHING IS COMING TO THE FRONT TOWARDS OUR DRIVEWAY. I'M, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE, THE BACK WHERE THE, WHERE IT'S A STRAIGHT LINE. YOU HAVE A SET BA YOU, YOUR FRONT, THE FRONT PROFILE OF THE BUILDING, WHICH FACES YOUR BUILDING IS, IS STEP BACK. RIGHT? IT'S A, IT'S STEPS. WELL, OUR BUILDING IS THE ONE AT THE, AT THE BOTTOM, BOTTOM, RIGHT? YES, SIR. AND THAT'S A PARAPET WALL IN THE BACK. OKAY. SO THAT PARAPET WALL IN THE BACK, IT'S, IT'S STRAIGHT. SO ALL THE DRAIN IS FOLLOWING THOSE ARROWS. OKAY. AND IT'S, IT'S A STRAIGHT WALL ON THIS PICTURE. RIGHT? WELL, WAS SLOPE, THE MIDDLE PORTION IS SLOPING. WELL, JUST, LET'S GO BACK TO THAT OTHER IMAGE. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I MAKE THIS POINT BECAUSE I TOTALLY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER. THIS DRAWING DOES NOT, IS NOT CONCUR WITH THE DRAWING THAT WAS JUST PREVIOUSLY SHOWN. YEAH. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THOSE, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. YEAH, SO THOSE, EXACTLY, THOSE, THOSE AREAS ARE MISSING, WHICH ARE FOUR PRETTY LARGE QUADRANTS OF ROOF, WHICH IS GONNA IMPACT YOUR, OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT PORTION THAT YOU HAVE THE ARROW ON RIGHT NOW IS, IS OUTSIDE, THAT'S A PATIO THAT'S NOT A ROOF. NOT ON THE SECOND STORY. YOU CAN GO TO YOUR SECOND STORY PLAN. RIGHT. SO IN THE MIDDLE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MIDDLE SECTION? NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THAT OUTSIDE SECTION WHERE THE GREEN IS. WELL, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. OKAY. BECAUSE IF YOU GO BACK TO YOUR SECOND STORY PLAN, THERE'S A, THERE'S AN ACTUAL BEDROOM THERE TO THE LEFT. THAT'S THE FIRST YOU HAVE A WOOD DECK. THAT'S THE FIRST YOU HAVE ON THE BOTTOM HALF OF THE UNIT. RIGHT? YOU'RE LOOKING AT ONLY ONE HALF OF THE BUILDING. YEP. OKAY. RIGHT THERE IN THAT PLAN. SO ON YOUR FIRST FLOOR, YOU HAVE A, A DECK THAT'S RECESSED INTO A SECOND STORY ROOM. AND SO YOUR SECOND STORY ACTUALLY EXTENDS OVER THAT DECK. THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. SO IN YOUR ROOF PLAN, IT DOESN'T SHOW THAT? OR DOES IT SHOW IT ON THE LOT COVERAGE PLAN? IT, IT, IT'S, IT SHOWS, IT, IT'S, IT'S OVER THE, THE BOTTOM FLOOR DECK. OH, THAT'S THE FOOTPRINT. I SEE WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, SQUARE ON THE RECTANGLE ON TOP, YEAH. THIS PLAN SHOWS THE FIRST FLOOR FOOTPRINT. YEAH. WHEREAS THE THAT'S CORRECT. THERE WILL BE A, SHOULD HAVE BEEN A DASH LINE UP THERE, AND THAT AS WELL IS GONNA BE, THAT DASH LINE WOULD BE A, A CONTINUATION OF THAT ROOF. THAT'S CORRECT. SO, SO JUST TO CLARIFY GOOD, GOOD POINT. SORRY. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, SORRY, TO CLEAR, CLEAR, YEAH. THAT AFFECTS YOUR LOT COVERAGE AND YOUR DRAINAGE IN A BIG WAY. SO I THINK IT'S, IT'S VERY, UH, IT, IT NEEDS TO BE, UH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS VERY CLEAR OF WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED HERE, BECAUSE THAT DRASTICALLY AFFECTS FOR ME HOW BIG THIS PROPERTY IS. AND IT DOES SPEAK TO, WHENEVER I FIRST LOOKED AT THIS, YOU KNOW, I WAS THINKING, OKAY, WELL, THE WAY IT UNDULATES ALONG THAT, THAT PRIVATE DRIVE, UM, IS GREAT FOR THE NEIGHBORS, IT BREAKS UP THAT WALL. IT BREAKS UP THAT, THAT FACADE, YOU KNOW, THAT 75 FEET OF WALL THAT THE NEIGHBORS WERE TALKING ABOUT, IT'S LIKE, WELL, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT UNDULATES IT BREAKS THAT UP. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, WHENEVER YOU LOOK AT THE, THE WAY THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY PROPOSED WITH THAT SECOND STORY VOLUME, YOU TAKE AWAY THAT. AND SO I, I DO HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT THE WAY THAT THAT IS CURRENTLY DE DESIGNED IS, IS VERY DRAMATIC FOR, FOR THAT BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS. SO I WOULD, UM, I GUESS ONE OF MY COMMENTS IS TO, UH, TO MY COMMISSIONERS IS LET'S DISCUSS HOW WE CAN FURTHER BREAK THAT DOWN AND MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. THAT, AND THAT IS MY POINT FROM THE BEGINNING, IS THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS EITHER WITH RESIDENTIAL GUIDELINES, AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS. AND THAT'S WHY STAFF HAS ALL THESE COMMENTS WE HAVE. IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE, UM, SITE PLAN FROM ABOVE WITH THE NEIGHBOR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTIES. ONE, ONE MORE THERE. I MEAN, HIS TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE LESS THAN A STORY. THESE ARE GONNA BE ALMOST TWO AND A HALF STORY BUILDINGS. AND WITH THE COMMENT THAT COMMISSIONER BOWMAN JUST, UH, MENTIONED, THE SETBACK BETWEEN THOSE TWO ARE NOT, IT'S NOT VERY BIG. IN FACT, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S FIVE FEET. I DON'T REMEMBER. BUT THERE'S A BIG, BIG PLANE RIGHT THERE. AND, UM, AND I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I AGREE WITH STAFF ON CONCEPTUAL PROOF OR NOT, I DO, I I DO WANNA COMMEND THE APPLICANT FOR JOINING THE, THE FOUR PROPERTIES IN TWO. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT AT D R C WHEN YOU SHOWED US THE FIRST TIME, HOW YOU JOINED THOSE. IT'S STILL, I THINK, I FEEL LIKE IT STILL NEEDS SOME MORE BREAKUP AND NOT [01:35:01] BE SUCH A BIG BLOCK. AND I FEEL THE ROOF FORMS ARE STILL SOMETHING THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT. ALL THESE ELEMENTS WILL AFFECT THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S STILL WAYS TO EXPLORE THIS LOT COVERAGE. UM, WE WALKED ON THE PROPERTY, WE WALKED AROUND, AROUND AND ALL THE STREETS AROUND. THE VIEW FROM HAY STREET TO ME IS VERY IMPORTANT. I KNOW THE STREET GOES UPHILL. YOU'VE DONE MOST OF THE HOMES ON HAY STREET. THEY WILL BE VISIBLE. I MEAN, WE COULD JUST SEE IT FROM JUST COMPARING THE HEIGHT FROM YOUR OFFICE AND THE DIFFERENCE OF THE NEW BUILDING COMPARED TO THE HEIGHT OF YOUR OFFICE AND WHAT'S VISIBLE, UM, COMING UP ON NORTH PINE STREET, IT MAY NOT BE AS VISIBLE RIGHT AWAY, BUT THEY WILL BE. I MEAN, THERE'S, I MEAN, THE PRIVATE DRIVEWAY AND, AND THEN I DO FEEL FOR, UM, ALL THE NEIGHBORS AROUND, WE HAVE TO CONSIDER ALL THE HOMES AROUND IT, THE ROOF FORMS, ALL THE DESIGNS. AND I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE NOT TAKING THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. IT'S BEEN ON MY POINT FROM THE BEGINNING IS YOU'RE STARTING TO EXPLORE SOME OF THAT, YOU KNOW, A FACADE, A FRONT DOOR, A DRIVEWAY ON THE SIDE, BUT I THINK IT'S STILL MISSING. AND THOSE ARE THE STIPULATIONS THAT STAFF HAS. THEY MAY NOT LIKE SOME, A COMMISSIONER SAID, MAYBE NOT AS IMPORTANT FOR CONCEPTUAL, BUT CONSIDERING THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS PROJECT AND HOW YOU HAVE WORKED PREVIOUSLY WITH OTHER PROJECT, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT BEFORE WE DO THE, THE CONCEPTUAL, I WOULD, UM, I WOULD ALSO AGREE WITH, UM, THIS, UM, NICHOLAS SPIKER FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS DOES LOOK VERY INDUSTRIAL AND YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T REALLY CONFORM, YOU KNOW, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE DONE SOME WORK TO TRY TO COME IN LINE WITH THINGS, BUT I THINK WE STILL HAVE SOME, SOME MORE WAYS TO GO ON THIS. CAN I MAKE A, A CORRECTION THAT THIS IS, IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT OUR REQUEST, OKAY, OUR REQUEST IS NOT RESIDENTIAL HOMES IS VERY CLEAR. WE'RE REQUESTING THAT THESE BE TWO COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. WE ACTUALLY REAPPLIED AT THE SUGGESTION OF MEETINGS THAT WE HAD WITH, WITH THE D R C, AND WE SAID WE NEED TO SPEAK TO THE FACT THAT THAT'S WHAT THESE ARE, THESE ARE NOT RESIDENTIAL HOMES. WE REAPPLIED PUTTING THE CORRECT LANGUAGE ON THERE. YES, THERE CAN BE A, A POSSIBILITY OF SOMEBODY LIVING THERE, WHICH IS A ZONING, UH, UH, WHICH IS A ZONING ALLOWED THING TO DO, WHICH WE, WHICH IS IN THE ZONING CODE, IS THEY HAVE A, A, THEY CALL SOMETHING AS LIVE WORK, MEANING YOU DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO BRING CERTAIN BUSINESSES, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T HAVE A, UH, HAMBURGER SHOP THERE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO IT'S NOT COMMERCIAL, BUT IT DOES ALLOW SOMEBODY TO LIVE IN THAT, IN THAT HOME, AND ALSO HAVE A BUSINESS THERE, UH, OF A CERTAIN NATURE. SO IT IS A, IS A DEFINED, YOU KNOW, TERM LIVE WORK. BUT THESE ARE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE PART OF OUR BUSINESS PARK. SO AS YOU COME IN, THAT'S WHY THEY ARE, THEY'VE BEEN ADDRESSED THIS WAY. THEY'LL HAVE ELEMENTS THAT ACTUALLY TIE TO OUR BUILDING. UH, WE HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME ATTRACTIVE GREEN WALLS MADE OUTTA METAL AND STEEL, AND WE'RE PROPOSING THOSE ON HERE, WHICH YOU'LL SEE ONCE WE GET THE CHANCE TO TAKE IT TO THE NEXT POSITION. UH, AND, AND HIT THE POINT ABOUT THE ROOF. THE PATIO THAT'S DOWN BELOW IS IN FACT PERVIOUS. OKAY? SO AS FAR AS LOT COVERAGE AND THE AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE AND OPEN SPACE, WE'RE ACTUALLY IMPROVING THAT BY THE DESIGN THAT WE'VE DONE. UH, YES, THERE IS A ROOF, AND I APOLOGIZE, UH, FOR OUR, UH, NOT SHOWING THAT AS, AS CLEAR AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN. THAT WAS A MISTAKE ON OUR PART. BUT ALL THAT WATER PLANS TO BRING, THAT'S THE REASON WE'RE TRYING TO CATCH AS MUCH WATER AS POSSIBLE AND BRING IT FORWARD, UH, SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY ELIMINATE AND ALLEVIATE THE CURRENT DRAINAGE PROBLEM THAT'S, THAT IS IN FACT HAPPENING AS, AS JUST THE WAY THE WATER FLOWS RIGHT NOW. SO WE'LL BE CHANGING EVERYTHING OUT THERE IN TERMS OF THE, THE AMOUNT OF, UH, OF, OF PERVIOUS AREAS RIGHT NOW IT'S ALL ASPHALT PARKING LOT, AND IT JUST RUNS, WHEN IT RAINS, THERE'S ONLY ONE PLACE TO GO. AND IT'S THAT BOTTOM CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. SIR. UM, I, I, UH, I AGREE WITH ONE OF THE COMMENTS DOWN, FELLOW COMMISSIONER, BUT ON THE LARGE PART, I, I DON'T AGREE WITH A, A LOT OF IT. UM, I THINK, I THINK YOUR, YOUR BUILDING HAS ADDED A LOT OF CHARACTER TO THE COMMUNITY THERE, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. UM, AND IT, IT PUTS YOU IN A, I THINK IN A UNIQUE SITUATION TO DRAW FROM TWO ARCHITECTURAL TYPES, THE TYPE THAT Y'ALL CREATED, AND THAT HAS BEEN WELCOMED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE, THE EXISTING HISTORIC STOCK AS WELL. NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT THERE'S A LOT OF TWO-STORY BUILDINGS IN THAT COMMUNITY THAT BLOCK A LOT OF VIEWS, RIGHT? BUT THEY'RE IN A DIFFERENT CONTEXT, RIGHT? BUT, BUT ALONG THE LINES OF THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE BY MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER OVER HERE IN TERMS OF THE UNDULATION AND, AND, AND THE NEIGHBOR, LET'S JUST SAY THAT FOR, LET'S NOT TALK ABOUT THE, ALL OF THE [01:40:01] DOTS ON THE MAP, BUT THE ONE DOT THE NEIGHBOR, RIGHT? THAT THAT HAS TO LIVE WITH A, WITH A WALL. I WAS NOTICING THAT THE FLOOR PLAN, UH, UH, WHAT'S PREVENTING THAT FROM HAPPENING IS A MASTER CLOSET. UM, AND, AND WITHOUT, WITHOUT, WITHOUT LOOKING AT, UH, WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES ARE. 'CAUSE I DON'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, STICK MY, MY NOSE IN, IN YOUR DESIGN SOLUTIONS, BUT, UH, IT, IT, IT, IT DOES PRESENT THE OPPORTUNITY TO BREAK UP THAT FACADE AND CREATE WHAT IS REALLY A COMMON COMMONLY EXPECTED SOLUTION IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, EVEN IN A COMMERCIAL CONTEXT, IN A MAIN STREET, THAT EVEN HISTORIC PREFERS THAT RATHER THAN THERE ARE THESE FLAT WALLS, THAT YOU BREAK IT UP SOMEHOW THAT OFFERS THAT OPPORTUNITY TO BREAK THAT UP. IT ALSO OFFERS THE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE NEIGHBOR TO NOT HAVE THIS, THIS FLAT SURFACE. SO I, I, I, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH, WITH, WITH THAT ASPECT, THAT YOU DO HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO BREAK UP THAT BACK WALL AND, AND, AND YOU SHOULD CONCEPTUALLY, I THINK THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, THAT, THAT IS POSSIBLE. BUT, BUT I ALSO WANT TO KINDA LOAN MY, UM, APPRECIATION FOR YOU, YOU KIND OF, SO TO SPEAK, BREAKING THE BOX IN THE SENSE THAT THEY'RE EMPTY LOTS. UH, YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE INFORMING YOURSELF BY, UH, EXISTING, UM, UM, UH, ARCHETYPE THAT YOU'VE, THAT THAT HAS BEEN CREATED THERE AND KIND OF AN ADAPTIVE REUSE AND FORM. SO I, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF SOMETHING THAT IS STRANGE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIGHT NOT, NOT NOT AGREE, UH, WITH ME. BUT, UM, IF YOU TAKE THAT STREET ALL THE WAY FROM, FROM 35, THERE IS THIS REALLY INTERESTING DIALOGUE. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA THERE, THERE'S A VERY INTERESTING DIALOGUE BETWEEN THIS HISTORIC THING THAT HAPPENED, THIS ART DECO THING THAT HAPPENS, THESE, THESE, UH, THIS KIND OF INDUSTRIAL FEEL. AND I, I FEEL LIKE, LIKE Y'ALL ARE REALLY COMPLIMENTING IT. UH, AND A LOT OF CASES, IT'S HARD TO BE ABLE TO APPRECIATE SOMETHING WHEN WE ARE IMAGINING IT. BUT I THINK IN A LOT OF CASES, UH, PEOPLE THAT WOULDN'T LIKE IT, ONCE THEY SEE IT DONE AND, AND THEY START TO FEEL IT, THEN THEY YEARS DOWN THE LINE, THEY, THEY CAN BEGIN TO APPRECIATE IT. IT WOULD USE THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY THAT EVERYBODY THOUGHT WAS HORRIBLE WHEN IT WAS BUILT BECAUSE OF THE HISTORIC CONTEXT OF DOWNTOWN. AND, AND EVERYBODY REALIZED THAT SAN ANTONIO HAD NO COLOR UNTIL LATA BUILT THAT BUILDING, RIGHT? SO, I, I, I APPLAUD, YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT Y'ALL DID. I'VE ALWAYS WONDERED WHO DID THAT, AND I THOUGHT THERE WAS A BEAUTIFUL, UH, SOLUTION FOR SUCH A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION. I THINK Y'ALL ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK, BUT I DO THINK IT'S A VERY BIG MISSED OPPORTUNITY TO NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE BACK IS A FRONT AS WELL, AND THE NEIGHBOR HAS TO LOOK AT THAT BACK. AND YOU SHOULD DESIGN FOR THE NEIGHBOR AS WELL AS YOU DESIGN FOR THE FRONT AND, AND IN, IN COORDINATION MAYBE WITH THE NEIGHBOR. UM, UM, SHOW THEM THAT GOOD FAITH THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT THE BACK IS AS IMPORTANT AS THE FRONT IS TO YOU. UH, AND I, I, I, I'M, I'M SURE THAT, THAT THE MAJORITY OF COMMISSIONS ARE NOT READY, UH, YOU KNOW, TO HEAR MOTION. BUT IF THEY WERE, I, I, I WOULD GAMBLE TO GET A, A SECOND ON A, ON A MOTION WITH, UM, PARTICULAR STAFF STIPULATIONS. NOT ALL OF THEM, BUT, UM, LET ME MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. OKAY. UM, I HAVE BEEN IN SEVERAL OF THE DRCS AND, UM, I THANK THE APPLICANTS FOR LISTENING TO COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND STAFF, UH, ESPECIALLY IN TERMS OF THE COMBINING THEM INTO TWO STRUCTURES AS OPPOSED TO FOUR, WHICH ALLOWED A GREATER SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS. IT ALLOWED, UH, PARKING, UH, TANDEM PARKING AS OPPOSED TO, UH, ALL FRONT, UH, YARD PARKING, UM, IS FOR CONCEPTUAL. AND I THINK THERE, UH, STEEL CAN BE SOME DEVELOPMENT, UH, BASED ON COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TODAY. UM, YOU KNOW, NOT KNOWING YOUR PROFORMA AND ALL THAT, UH, THE SIZE OF THE MASTER BEDROOM MAY BE IN QUESTION WHERE YOU COULD PULL THAT BACK AND MAYBE THE, THE CLOSET IN THE, THE, UH, UH, MASTER BATH, MASTER MASTER CLOSET, RIGHT? YEAH. UH, SO THAT, AGAIN, YOU COULD UNDULATE OR STEP BACK THAT, UH, SECOND STORY TO, UH, ALLEVIATE THAT SECOND FLOOR WALL ACROSS THAT ENTIRE LANE, SOLID WALL. GOT IT. OKAY. RIGHT? MM-HMM. , UM, WE DID DISCUSS THAT THE, UH, FRONT DOORS OF THESE, THE FRONT FACADES, UH, FACE THE COMMERCIAL, UH, BUILDING ACROSS THE DRIVE, AND THAT'S WHAT, UH, YOU'RE SHOWING HERE. AND THAT, UM, IN FURTHER DEVELOPMENT, [01:45:01] WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT, UH, MORE TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL, UH, DETAILING AND MATERIALS THAT WOULD BE UP AGAINST THE, UH, THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY, RIGHT? UM, SO IT BASICALLY HAVE TWO CHARACTERS, ONE BEING THE COMMERCIAL, UH, FRONT, AND THEN THE MORE RESIDENTIAL BACK. AND, UM, Y'ALL WERE, UH, AGREEABLE TO THAT, UH, FURTHER DISCUSSION. UM, I THINK THE, UM, THE CROSS SECTIONS THAT ARE SHOWN ON, UH, SHEET 26 START TO SHOW, UH, SOME OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THESE BUILDINGS AND THE ADJACENT, UH, UH, PROPERTIES, UM, HEIGHT-WISE AND, UH, CLEARANCE WISE WE'RE SMALLER SCALE, RIGHT? EVERYBODY CAN SEE THAT YES, WE'RE SMALLER THAN THE BUILDINGS NEXT TO US, OKAY? AND, UM, ANY PROJECT THAT GOES FORWARD WOULD HAVE TO, UH, MEET ALL OF THE CITY'S, UH, PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE, UH, DRAINAGE ISSUES, RIGHT? UH, SO THAT, UH, NOT DRAINING ONTO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. UH, SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS RIGHT NOW. COULD I MAKE A, JUST A CORRECTION JUST TO MAKE SURE. THESE BUILDINGS, THE WHOLE LOT IS, IS EACH LOT IS 35 FEET. SO FROM LOT TO LOT ON A DUPLEX, IT'S 70 FEET OF LOT. WE DON'T HAVE 70 FEET OF HOUSE. WE HAVE 40 TO 50 FEET OF HOUSE, OKAY? JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT MAYBE THEY'VE PICKED UP ON A NUMBER OF 35, AND THEY THINK THAT'S THE WIDTH OF THE HOUSE, AND THAT'S THE WIDTH OF THE LOT. WE HAVE A 12 FOOT SETBACK ON EACH SIDE FOR THE DRIVEWAY, AND ALL THE HOMES ARE NOW SEPARATED BY 12 TO 14 FEET. THE DUPLEXES ARE, SO, BY, BY THE GOOD COMMENTS OF THAT WE GOT FROM, FROM THE D R C MEETINGS AND PUTTING THEM TOGETHER, THAT OPENED IT UP TO ALLOW US TO DO THESE THINGS. SO NOW, IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT IT, THESE ARE SEPARATE STRUCTURES THAT HAVE A LOT OF SPACE BETWEEN THEM NOW, UH, AND, YOU KNOW, COMMENT THAT WHERE THEY'RE ONLY THREE FEET APART AND THINGS LIKE THAT, JUST NOT, YOU KNOW, NOT QUITE ACCURATE AT ALL. UH, SITTING OFF THE BACK WE'RE MORE THAN FIVE FEET OFF THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH ALMOST EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY HAS A, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT DOING THESE, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS WHERE WE'RE THREE FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE. WE'RE ACTUALLY BY THIS PLAN, WE ACTUALLY, UH, PULLED OFF, UH, A PART OF THE, THE HOUSE IS ABOUT SIX FEET AWAY, BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE, WE SHAPED THESE THINGS AND CREATED THOSE COURTYARDS IN THE BACK, WE'VE GOT A LOT NICER BACKYARDS THAT WE HAD THEN BEFORE. SO WE ACTUALLY, THIS PLAN, WE WENT A LONG, LONG WAY TO, TO, TO KIND OF MITIGATE SOME OF THOSE THINGS. SO YEAH, I THANK YOU FOR, FOR THAT, THAT CLARIFICATION. AND I, I WANT TO, UH, ALSO COMMEND YOU FOR THE CHANGES THAT YOU MADE FROM THE LAST TIME WE SAW THIS. I THINK YOU'RE DEFINITELY MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I THINK THAT, UM, SOME OF THE, THE THINGS THAT YOU ADDRESSED, UM, IN THE WAY THAT YOU BROUGHT THE BUILDINGS TOGETHER, THE WAY THAT THEY ARE, ARE UNDULATING IN THE FRONT. I THINK THAT'S WORKING. I STILL THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A LOT OF WORK ON THE UNDULATION ON THE BACK, OKAY? THE WAY THAT THAT SECOND STORY COMES ACROSS STRAIGHT, I THINK THAT THAT, UH, JUST DOESN'T WORK. I THINK THAT THE, UH, PROFILE OF THE BUILDING, THE WAY THAT YOU'RE SHOWING IT IN YOUR DRAINAGE PLAN, I THINK THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT COULD WORK. UM, AND I COULD SUPPORT THAT. BUT I THINK CURRENTLY, AS IT IS SHOWN, I, I, I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT, UH, CONCEPTUAL DESIGN. BUT I DO WANT TO COMMEND YOU. I WANNA MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT. I DO APPRECIATE ALL OF THE, THE CHANGES THAT YOU'VE MADE SO FAR. I THINK THEY'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. WOULD YOU BE OKAY IF I STIPULATED THE FACT THAT WE WOULD, IN THE NEXT DESIGN RE-LOOK AT THE BACK REAR ELEVATIONS? UH, I'M TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT. ABSOLUTELY, AND I WILL, I, I WOULD LET, UH, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT STIPULATION, HOW THAT'S WORDED, AND THEN I'LL, I CAN TRY TO SUPPORT IT. WELL, I, I WANTED TO MAKE, MAKE A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE CONCEPTUAL WITH, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS STIPULATED BY STAFF ONE, TWO, AND SEVEN, AND ADD, UM, UM, THE STIPULATION THAT THE REAR FACADE, UM, WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE CONTINUOUS. THAT, THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BROKEN UP AND, AND VERY SPECIFICALLY ONE, TWO, AND SEVEN, NOT THE OTHERS. BECAUSE I THINK THAT IF, IF THEY'RE GONNA BE INFORMED BY THEIR EXISTING BUILDING, THEN THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE LEEWAY TO EXPERIMENT WITH, WITH DIMENSIONS OF WINDOWS AND FENESTRATION THAT THAT CAN RELATE TO THE FRONT FACADE. UH, WHE WHETHER THEY'RE METAL CLAD OR WOOD IS, TO ME, DOESN'T MATTER. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE STYLE, SIZE, OR THE LOCATION OF, OF, OF THAT, THEN IT COULD BE INFORMED, IT COULD CREATE, UM, IT COULD LIMIT, UM, WHICH WAY IT LEANS. [01:50:01] AND IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE THEIR SOLUTION, WHETHER IT LEANS MORE TOWARD THE, THE STEEL AND, AND, AND CONCRETE BUILDING, OR THE WOOD AND RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. IT SHOULD BE UP TO THEM. I, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU KEEP ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF THROUGH CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL UNTIL WE GET TO FINAL AND JUST SEE WHAT, SEE WHAT DETAILS WE COME BACK WITH IT FINAL. OKAY? THEN I'LL AMEND THE MOTION AS RECOMMENDED WITH, WITH, WITH ALL RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF TO ADD THE, UM, UH, REQUIREMENT FOR, UH, A BROKEN UP FACADE IN THE BACKGROUND AND IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, NOT IN THE, IN THE REAR FACADE, IN NOT ALLOWING FOR CONTINUOUS WALL. SECOND, UH, THERE'S A WAY TO SAY THAT THAT'S IN QUOTE, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY IT. WHAT'S IMPORTANCE THAT THE APPLICANT IS NODDING? I THINK HE UNDERSTANDS AS WELL. WE UNDERSTAND, WE UNDERSTAND. WE WANNA DO THE SAME. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE ADD A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, IF I CAN, AS A CHAIRMAN, IS, UH, THAT THE APPLICANT COME BACK TO THE D R C ONCE THE, UH, FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT, UH, CONTINUES SO THAT WE CAN WORK WITH YOU AND, UH, MAKE SURE THAT, UH, THESE STIPULATIONS ARE, UH, BEING FOLLOWED AND, AND ADDRESSED. AND, UM, AS YOU'VE DONE IN THE CONCEPTUAL, I THINK, UH, WORKING WITH THE D R C, THE PROJECT IS, IS GETTING BETTER AND HOPEFULLY WILL, UH, GET TO A, A GOOD PROJECT. UH, AND I WOULD ACCEPT THAT FRIENDLY, FRIENDLY, UH, AMENDMENT. I, I, UM, BUT I, I ALSO WANT JUST IN COMMENTS TO RECORD THAT, THAT, UH, THAT THEY CAN EXPECT THAT IT, THEY COME BEFORE US AND THEIR DESIGN, UM, SAY FOR INSTANCE, IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH FOUR THAT WE HAVE, THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE ALSO EXPECTING THAT THEY MAY BE INFORMED BY BUILDINGS, BY A BUILDING THAT IS NOT YOUR TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN THAT AREA. BUT I, I ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT AND, AND THAT MY EXPECTATION INCLUDES THAT IF THEY HAVE GOOD DESIGN, THAT IT'S GOOD DESIGN, REGARDLESS OF STIPULATION FOR, HAVE AN AMENDED, UH, MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. AYE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. I LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING BACK WITH EVERYBODY ON THE NEXT STEP. THANK YOU. AGENDA [B-14 20-2196 Address/Description: 2050 W MULBERRY AVE HDRC Case No.: 2019-515 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: Alfred Luna Request: Demolition and reconstruction of rear accessory structure City Council Dist.: 7] ITEM B 14 H C R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 5 15 20 50 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTING REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND RECONSTRUCT A REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO CLOSELY MATCH THE EXISTING. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ONLY. THE REPLACEMENT PLAN SUBMITTED INDICATE THAT THE APPLICANT WILL CONSTRUCT A NEW REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITHIN THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS THE EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. THE REPLACEMENT REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 527 SQUARE FEET AND GENERAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES CONTRIBUTE TO THE CHARACTER OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT. UNREASONABLE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. THE APPLICANT HAS OUTLINED THE COST FOR DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION, BUT HAS NOT PROVIDED AN ESTIMATED COST FOR REPAIR. STAFF DOES NOT FIND THAT EVIDENCE FOR U D C SECTION 35 DASH SIX 14 B HAS BEEN MET BASED ON THE DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED. RECOMMENDATION ITEM ONE, STAFF AND STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION OF THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT THIS TIME BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH E. IF THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FINDS THAT THE THRESHOLD FOR UNREASONABLE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OR LOSS OF SIGNIFICANCE HAS BEEN MET AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING. ITEM TWO, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDING F WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TAKE PLACE WITHIN A TIMEFRAME OF 180 DAYS. AND TWO, THAT MATERIALS FROM THE HISTORIC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, INCLUDING WOOD SIDING, WOOD DOORS, AND WOOD WINDOWS BE SALVAGED AND UTILIZED IN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. A COMPREHENSIVE SALVAGE PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS THAT INDICATES WHERE RECLAIMED MATERIALS WILL BE USED IN THE NEW STRUCTURE WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. AND THEN WE DO HAVE SOME CITIZENS TO BE HURT. NAME IS ALFRED LUNA. I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT 2050. MULBERRY DIDN'T PICK UP ON, ON WHAT'S NOT APPROVED, GENTLEMEN AND LADY, IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT PICTURE. [01:55:02] PARDON? IF YOU COULD SPEAK IT TO THE MIC. OKAY. IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT PICTURE, THE OPENING ON ITS, THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN GET A VEHICLE IN THERE. THIS WAS CONSTRUCTED PROBABLY IN THE EARLY 19 HUNDREDS. I BOUGHT THIS PRO THIS PROPERTY IN 1994. AT THE TIME, I WAS TOLD THAT THAT GARAGE, SO-CALLED GARAGE WAS IN THE SAME SHAPE AT LEAST 15, 20 YEARS PRIOR. UH, IT DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD TO ANYBODY. I DO HAVE ANY, ANY, UH, GOOD USE OF THAT STRUCTURE. THE WATER, THE LANDSCAPE FLOWS BACK FROM THE STREET TOWARD THE ALLEY, AND EVERY TIME IT RAINS, WHEN YOU GET A GOOD RAIN, UH, STORM, IT JUST RUNS RIGHT INTO THE GARAGE BECAUSE THE SLAB IS RIGHT AT GREAT LEVEL THERE. AND THE ONLY THING THAT CAN BE DONE TO THAT IS TO TEAR DOWN AND REBUILD. I, UH, UH, PUT IN MY APPLICATION. I WANNA PUT A NEW SLAB ON TOP OF THE EXISTING SLAB, AND THEN I CAN BE ABLE TO DIVERT THE WATER ON GOING INTO IT. TRY AND USE, I'D SAY MAYBE, MAYBE ABOUT A THIRD, MAYBE LESS OF THE MATERIALS ON THERE. THAT'S ABOUT IT. THE OPENING ON THAT STRUCTURE. RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE FIVE FEET HIGH. I'M FIVE FOOT 11. I DONE BUMP MY HEAD A LOT OF TIMES JUST GOING IN THERE AND CLEARING OUT DEBRIS THAT WAS IN THAT, IN THAT STRUCTURE THERE. SO IT IS NOT, IT'S, IT'S NOT ANY GOOD. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE, UH, INFORMATION YOU NEED, WHAT I HAVE TO DO TO GET THIS APPROVED? WELL, I, IT'S AN EYESIGHT. IT'S AN, IT'S A BAD SITE ACCORDING TO THE CITY. AND, AND AGAIN, THINK NOW THAT THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT IS ALSO LOOKING AT IT BECAUSE IT'S A SORE SITE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT SINCE I, I WOULD SAY AT AT LEAST, UH, MAYBE 19 75, 19 80. SO, SO I DO, I HAVE A, A COUPLE OF COMMENTS FOR YOU. IT, IT LOOKS LIKE STAFF, UM, IS RECOMMENDING THE NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BASED ON, UM, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF, OR, AND I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THIS WITH STAFF TOO. YOU'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE NEW RE ACCESSORY, UH, REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, OR IF YOU DO, THEN IT'S GONNA BE, IT NEEDS THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE SALVAGE PLAN AND THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BUILT AS IT AS IT STANDS TODAY. SO IT'D HAVE TO BE RECONSTRUCTED THAT WAY. IS THAT CORRECT? REBUILT AS IT STANDS. EXPLAIN YOURSELF. THAT'S I'M, I'M SORRY, THE, THE STRUCTURE AS IT STANDS, THE DIMENSIONS SILL HEIGHTS, PLATE HEIGHTS, THE PERIMETER DIMENSIONS. PARDON THE CODE. WELL, ALL OF THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE IT'S A HISTORIC STRUCTURE BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO MAINTAIN HISTORIC FABRIC OF SAN ANTONIO. WE WOULD BE TRYING TO REBUILD THIS AS IT'S, AS, AS IT'S BUILT AND AS IT WAS DESIGNED IN THE EARLY 19 HUNDREDS OR LATE 18 HUNDREDS. IS THAT CORRECT? STAFF? CORRECT. IT WOULD BE RECONSTRUCTED PER THE APPLICANT'S DRAWINGS, SUBMITTED DRAWINGS. RIGHT. AND I DON'T THINK IT'S, BUT THE DRAWINGS DON'T SHOW HEIGHT, SO THAT'S THE ISSUE, RIGHT? I DON'T THINK IT'S AN EXACT MATCH, AND WE'RE NOT REQUIRING THAT IT BE AN EXACT MATCH. WE'RE FINDING THAT THE REPLACEMENT PLANS ARE GENERALLY APPROPRIATE. OKAY, BEFORE WE GET INTO FURTHER COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS, UH, WE HAVE SOME CITIZENS TO BE HEARD AND THEN WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP, SIR. URGENT VAN LEAVE. THIS IS VERY BRIEF. VIRGINIA VAN CLEED, 91 18 FAIRLAND SAN ANTONIO REPRESENTING THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. VERY BRIEF. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2050 WEST MULBERRY AVENUE. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIOS. [02:00:04] UM, AND WE'LL PULL THE APPLICANT BACK UP TO THE PODIUM. UM, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, UM, GENERALLY STAFF IS COMFORTABLE WHAT'S WITH WHAT IS PROPOSED? THE U D C REQUIRES FOR DEMOLITIONS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, THAT UNREASONABLE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP HAS TO BE PROVIDED IN ORDER TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT TYPE OF DECISION. UM, AND WE JUST HAVEN'T RECEIVED IT. SO WE'RE UNABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL AT THIS TIME. UM, BUT WE WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT FEEDBACK REGARDING THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT IN CASE THE COMMISSION FEELS, UM, COMPELLED TO APPROVE IT. , EXCUSE ME, BUT, UH, WHAT WAS IT THAT YOU HAVEN'T RECEIVED? SO IT'S HOW, WHAT WOULD THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP BE TO REPAIR AND RETAIN THE STRUCTURE, ECONOMIC HARDSHIP TO WHO? TO YOU AS THE PROPERTY OWNER. I DON'T CARE. NO, SIR. UH, LET ME EXPLAIN MAYBE WHAT, SO WE HAVE IN THE GUIDELINES THAT SAY THAT WE CAN, THE REASON WHY THEY CAN'T STAFF CAN'T RECOMMEND A MILIAN IS BECAUSE ECONOMICS HARDSHIP HAS NOT BEEN MET BECAUSE OF ONE ITEM MISSING. ONE ITEM MISSING IS WHAT WOULD IT COST TO PREPARE THIS TO BE USABLE? SO IF WE HAD KIND OF A NUMBER TO THAT, COMPARING IT TO WHAT IT WOULD COST TO WHICH YOU ALREADY PROVIDED TO REBUILD IT TO A NEW ONE. SO I UNDERSTAND, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S THE REASON WHY STAFF CANNOT DETERMINE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. SO RIGHT NOW IT'S UP TO US BY LOOKING AT THE PICTURES. UM, I UNDERSTAND FROM YOU THAT THIS HAS BEEN LIKE THIS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS AND THERE'S NO CONCRETE FOUNDATION ITSELF. I AM THINK I'M MORE WORRIED ABOUT THE, UH, REBUILDING OF IT AND MAKING SURE THAT IF A DEMOLITION OR IF SOME OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD FIND A DEMOLITION, UM, GRANT, THE REBUILD IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT'S WHAT WE SEE RIGHT HERE IN NOT ONLY FOOTPRINT. I, I SEE FOR EXAMPLE, IN YOUR DRAWINGS THAT YOU HAVE TWO OPTIONS FOR GARAGE DOOR, EITHER TWO DOORS OR ONE DOOR. HAVE YOU DECIDED WHICH ONE YOU WANNA PREFER OR IS IT UP TO US? UNLESS YOU PUT A RESTRICTION ON ME, I'LL PUT TWO DOORS ON THERE. SO IN TERMS OF THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, YOU'RE PROPOSING TO BUILD BACK THE EXACT SAME SIZE FOOTPRINT, BASICALLY THE SAME, SAME SIZE AS FAR AS SQUARE FOOT, WHICH IS CONCERNED IT'S GOTTA BE UP AT LEAST, UH, EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT ON, ON THE, ON THE TOP PLATE. WELL, IT DID SAYS THAT HE'S GONNA POUR A SLAB ON TOP OF THE OLD SLAB. I DO HAVE TO TAKE IT DOWN, TEAR IT DOWN. OKAY, SO I CAN PUT THAT SLAB ON THERE WITH ADDITIONAL ANCHOR BOLTS ON THAT, AND THEN PUT THE SOLE PLATE ON TOP OF THE NEW CONCRETE SLAB AND THEN PUT THE EIGHT FOOT STUTTS ON IT. NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PLYWOOD SIDING. WELL, THAT WAS AN OPTION. EITHER USE PLYWOOD, SIDING OR, OR, OR, OR USE, USE. WHAT IF I CAN USE SOME OF THAT SIDING I'LL USE ON THAT, BUT ALL THE BOTTOM SIDE IS ALL DETERIORATED. BUT IF IT'S A, A SPECULATION THAT IT HAS TO BE MASHED. THE SIDING ON THERE, SIR? THE, THE, UM, THE STAFF HAS TWO RECOMMENDATIONS, RIGHT? ONE AND TWO, AND TWO TELLS YOU EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT YOU TO DO. MATERIALS FROM THE HISTORIC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, INCLUDING WOOD SIDING, WOOD DOORS, WOOD WINDOWS BE SALVAGED AND UTILIZED IN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT THEY WANT YOU TO USE WHAT YOU SAVE, RIGHT? OKAY. YES. WHICH MEANS THAT WHAT YOU DON'T SAVE, YOU PROBABLY HAVE TO REPLACE IT WITH SOMETHING THAT MATCHES IT, BECAUSE LIKE YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE TWO DIFFERENT KINDS OF SIDING, RIGHT? SO THEY WANT YOU TO, TO BUILD WHAT, WHAT IS TO REBUILD WHAT IS THERE, BUT OBVIOUSLY TO MEET CODE, RIGHT? THERE REALLY ISN'T ANYTHING ELSE HERE, RIGHT? SO, UM, IF WE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS STAFF, THEN I IMAGINE Y'ALL WOULD WORK WITH HIM TO MAKE IT HAPPEN THE WAY THAT YOU'RE EXPECTING TO MAKE IT HAPPEN, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, UM, CONSISTENT WITH CONSISTENT STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATIONS. ITEM ITEM TWO. [02:05:01] ITEM TWO. MOTION TO APPROVE. I, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS CONSISTENT WITH ITEM TWO. SECOND. MOTION A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WAS THAT CLEAR? THERE WOULD STILL NEED TO BE AN APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE IN ORDER TO MOVE ON TO ITEM TWO. AND, AND ANOTHER QUESTION. WOULD THERE, UM, WOULD THIS NEED TO COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION ONCE WE GET FINAL PLANS FOR THE ATTACHED STRUCTURE? IT WOULD NOT, THE APPLICANT CAN WORK WITH STAFF TO SUBMIT, UH, COMPLIANT DRAWINGS. LET ME REPHRASE THE MOTION AND THEN OKAY, THEN THE COMMISSION. OKAY, WELL, NO, I, IT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEM ONE, DEMOLITION AS STIPULATED HERE AND THEN AND ITEM TWO, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS? YES, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ARE WE ALL CLEAR? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? SAY NAYYY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP? YOU'LL, UH, WORK WITH STAFF AND, UH, THEY'LL GET WITH YOU ON WHAT'S THE NEXT STEPS ARE, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, DISCUSSING THE DEMOLITION AND SALVAGE. JUST, JUST ONE QUICK COMMENT. UM, ARE YOU GONNA EMPLOY A, A GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO HELP YOU BUILD THIS? I CAN DO IT MYSELF. OKAY. I'VE DONE THE CONSTRUCTION THERE FOR UMPTEEN THOUSAND YEARS, RIGHT? I WAS JUST GONNA MAKE THE COMMENT THAT IT MIGHT BE, UH, ADVISABLE TO JUST GO AHEAD AND GET RID OF THAT OLD SLAB AND PUT IN NEW FILL RATHER THAN TRY AND INTUNE IT WITH THE NEW CONCRETE. JUST, IS THAT GONNA BE A STIPULATION THERE? NO, THE MOTION IS COMPLETED. I'D RATHER JUST POUR THE, UH, A NEW SLAB ON TOP OF IT. GOOD LUCK TO YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. AGENDA ITEM [B-15 20-2182 Address/Description: 1544 W MISTLETOE HDRC Case No.: 2019-610 Applicant: Bobby Nix Request: Window replacement City Council Dist.: 1] B 15 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2019 DASH 6 10 15 44 WEST MISSILE TOE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE EXISTING WINDOWS WITH NEW WINDOWS. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO REPLACE 15 EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS WITH VINYL REPLACEMENT WINDOWS. STAFF PERFORMED A SITE VISIT TO THE PROPERTY ON JANUARY 28TH, 2020. DURING THE SITE VISIT, STAFF OBSERVED THE FOLLOWING DAMAGE TO THE WINDOWS PAINT, PEELING OR CHIPPING, DAMAGED OR MISSING CORDS, MINOR WOOD ROD ON TWO SASHES AND UNEVEN SASHES IN THE WINDOW FRAME. ALL WINDOWS ARE CURRENTLY INOPERABLE. STAFF DID NOT OBSERVE ANY SIGNIFICANT WOOD ROT OR WATER DAMAGE. OVERALL, THE WINDOWS WERE FOUND TO BE FULLY REPAIRABLE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS. A THROUGH C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT REPAIR THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS IN PLACE IF AN ASSEMBLY IS DEEMED DETERIORATED. BEYOND REPAIR BY THE H D R C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE NEW WINDOWS MEET THE, UM, STANDARD STAFF WOOD WINDOW STIPULATIONS. AND AS A CASE COMMENT, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED THAT ANY WINDOWS APPROVED FOR REMOVAL WILL BE DONATED TO A SALVAGE ORGANIZATION SUCH AS PICKERS PARADISE, THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE. SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, IN, UH, LIEU OF ABSENCE OF THE, UH, APPLICANT, UH, I WOULD, UH, LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE HAVE A SITE VISIT OF THIS TO SEE THE CONDITION OF THE WINDOWS. IF STAFF COULD ARRANGE FOR THAT, AND WE WOULD, UH, THEN, UH, CONTINUE THIS FOR OUR NEXT H D R C HEARING. I WILL, WE HAVE TO MOVE MAYBE THIS TO A D R C. WOULD THAT BE A HAVE TO BE A MOTION? WELL, LET ME SECOND IT AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION, RIGHT? YES. THAT'S MY INTENT, THAT IT GOES TO A D R C SITE VISIT AND THEN WOULD BE FOLLOWED UP AT A FUTURE H D R C HEARING. I, I'LL SECOND THAT. UH, I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE COMMENT TO MY FELLOW COMMISSION OVER HERE, KNOWING THE, THE, UM, OPINION, TYPICAL OPINION REGARDING VINYL WINDOWS. I WOULD TEND TO THINK THAT IT'D PROBABLY BE BENEFICIAL TO, FOR THE MOTION TO EX BE IN LINE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF, BECAUSE IT'S AN EXISTING STRUCTURE IN LINE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF, OF STAFF AND HAVE A A D R C SO THAT, UH, THEY HAVE THIS AND THEN THEY HAVE THE OPTION ALSO TO VISIT WITH, WITH THE COMMITTEE OVER THERE AT THEIR HOUSE. BECAUSE THE VI THE VINYL WINDOW IN AN EXISTING BUILDING I KNOW IS IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA MEET APPROVAL HERE. IT'S AN OPINION, [02:10:01] BUT IT'S, YEAH, I, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I THINK THERE'S ALSO, SOMETIMES WE TRY TO FIND WAYS OF MITIGATING THINGS. UM, BUT I, I ACCEPT THAT AS A, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO MY MOTION. I'LL STILL SECOND IT. YEAH, MY MOTION IS SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. SO IS THAT A NO NO. THE MOTION IS FOR A D R C SITE. IS THAT OKAY? NO, I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW. BUT IS THAT A DENIAL FOR THE VINYL WINDOWS OR IS THAT JUST A COMMENT ON NO, IF THE PRO, IF THE REQUEST WAS DENIED, THERE'D BE NO NEED FOR A D R C SITE VISIT. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THE, THE AMENDMENT THE WAY IT WAS WORDED. OKAY. MOTION A SECOND TO SEND THIS TO D R C. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. ITEM B 16 H T R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 0 4 9. WE DID A MOTION THAT, UH, WE DID THIS CASE, BUT WE DID HAVE A CITIZEN TO BE HEARD. I'M SORRY. WE DID, I APOLOGIZE. UM, SORRY. WE HAVE, HELLO, MY NAME IS KYLE CONTRERAS. I LIVE AT TWO 10 ADAMS. I HAVE DONE SO FOR 39 YEARS. YOU'VE COME INTO EXISTENCE AFTER WE MOVED IN. SO THIS IS ALL NEW TO ME, MA'AM, I APOLOGIZE. UM, WE WERE GONNA CALL UP OUR, OUR SPEAKER WHO SIGNED IN FOR 1544 WEST MISSAL TO MS. VAN CLEVE. DO YOU STILL WANNA SPEAK ON THAT ITEM? I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT CALLING. ALRIGHT, I'M SORRY. VIRGINIA VAN CLEVE 91 18 FAIRLAND, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, UH, REPRESENTING THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1544 WEST MISSILE TOE. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO. THANK YOU EDDIE . OKAY, NOW I GO TO [B-16 20-2142 Address/Description: 210 ADAMS ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-049 Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Kyle Contreras/San Antonio Mission Trail Rotary Request: Front porch modifications City Council Dist.:1] TWO 10 ADAMS. OKAY, ITEM NUMBER B 16 H T R C. CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 0 4 9. ADDRESS, TWO 10 ADAMS STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO MODIFY THE EXISTING FRONT PORCH, DESIGNED TO FEATURE STRAIGHT BALL STRAITS INSTEAD OF THE EXISTING TURN. BASTS STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE STRAIGHT BALUSTRADE DESIGN AS PROPOSED STAFF FINDS THAT CHANGE MAY BE APPROPRIATE, BUT RECOMMENDS THAT THE NEW BALUSTRADES FEATURE A SIMPLIFIED TURN DESIGN IN LIEU OF THE PROPOSED STRAIGHT BALUSTRADE. AS NOTED IN BINDING B I SUBMITTED THE STRAIGHT BALUSTRADE ONES BECAUSE MY DOCUMENTATION SHOWED THAT. SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING. IT'S FROM THE SEVENTIES IN THE, UM, THE ORIGINAL PLANS FROM FORD, PAUL AND CARSON, WHEN THEY PUT THE RENOVATION TOGETHER, SHOWED STRAIGHT AND I THOUGHT, AH, THEY WERE STRAIGHT. BUT I'M OKAY WITH PUTTING THE TURN WINDS BACK IN. I JUST THOUGHT I WOULD PUT IT BACK TO THE WAY IT WASN'T BEFORE WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE. SO, UM, I WILL ACCEPT. LET'S SEE, WHAT'S YOUR PHRASING? THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STIPULATIONS? HOW DOES IT WORK? QUESTION FOR STAFF. DO, DO, DO YOU HAVE A, UM, RECORD THAT, THAT THE STRAIGHT ONES AREN'T THE ORIGINAL. WE KNOW THAT THEY WERE STRAIGHT IN 1978. WE DO NOT KNOW THAT THEY WERE ORIGINAL, BUT THE POSTS WERE ALSO DIFFERENT IN 1978. THERE'S QUITE A FEW MODIFICATIONS YOU CAN SEE THE DOOR HAS MOVED, THE DORMER HAD BEEN ADDED. SO THAT RENOVATION WAS A LOT OF OF WORK. SO IF YOU COMPARE THE EXISTING COLORFUL SHOT OF THE HOUSE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS, THAT'S THE CLOSEST MATCH, RIGHT? THAT'S THE EXISTING, AND THEN IF YOU GO DOWN TO THE DRAWING, THAT'S ALL THERE WITH STRAIGHT BALIST STRAITS. SO I WAS JUST, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT, WELL, NOT THAT DRAWING IS YOUR DRAWING. NO, MA'AM. THAT'S FROM FORD, PAUL AND CARSON. THIS IS THE ERA WHEN ARCHITECTS DID KIND OF HAND SKETCHED THINGS. THAT'S COMPELLING. BUT THE POSTS ARE DIFFERENT. LOOK AT THE FRONT DOOR WHERE IT'S AT ON THE CURRENT POST. IT DID MOVE THE DOOR A FEW FEET FROM THE ORIGINAL POSITION, BUT IT'S, I I I DID. I AGREE. YOU HAVE P BALLOTS, A BALLER GOES ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE STAIRS. RIGHT, RIGHT. BUT SHE'S SAYING THAT THIS SKETCH WAS DONE BY FORD. PAUL CARSON. YEAH. I HAVE THE ROLLED UP PLANS. THAT'S THAT OLD THAT, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT LIKE TRUMPS JUST ABOUT ANY OPINION IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO? I I COULD HAVE, UM, BROUGHT THE ROLLED UP ONCE, BUT THEY'RE PRETTY YELLOWED. UM, I WENT AND TRIED TO GET THEM ELECTRONICALLY AND I SAID, THEY SAID I PREDATED THEIR ELECTRONIC RECORDS. LET'S TRY TO GET A, UH, THE ORIGINAL SURVEY. SO I HAD TO PAY FOR IT [02:15:01] AGAIN. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT USING THIS AS AN APPROVED DESIGN. I, I MEAN, I, I WANNA USE WHAT WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY TO BE ABLE TO APPROVE THIS. NOT BECAUSE OF THAT DESIGN. I MEAN THAT DRAWING IS NOT THE DESIGN THAT WE, YOU COULD BE USING. YOU'RE JUST, YOU'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING ON THE POST OR MOVING THEM AROUND OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. NO, I'M, YEAH, ALL THE RADS I WOULD SAY IF I HAVE TWO THAT ARE OKAY, I'D BE SURPRISED THEY'RE REALLY GONE. BUT, UH, SO, UM, BUT YOU'RE NOT CHANGING MODIFYING ANY OF THE LOCATION OF THE POST? NO, NO. I NEED THEM EXACTLY WHERE THEY ARE. THE POSTS ARE ACTUALLY, OKAY. I HAVE ONE IN THE CORNER THAT'S, UM, I'M LOSING ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE. SO THAT ONE HAS TO GET REPLACED 'CAUSE IT'S, IT'S FALLING OFF IN CHUNKS. IS THAT PART OF THE APPLICATION TODAY TO REPAIR THE REPORT? I'M SORRY? REPAIR AND MAYBE JUST REPAIR AND I'M GONNA DUPLICATE THAT POST. YEAH. OKAY. 'CAUSE THEY MATCH THE OTHERS. IT'S JUST THAT THE BAS STRADS I JUST THOUGHT, HUH? THEY WERE STRAIGHT. SO, WELL, THEY, IT LOOKS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORIC PHOTO THAT'S AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PREDATE, WHICH PREDATES THE DRAWING. YEAH, THAT WAS, THAT SHOWS SQUARE POSTS. MM-HMM. AND SQUARE BALLISTERS DRAWING DONE BY FORD PAL. AND CARSON. AND CARSON. THEY WENT TO THE TURNED COLUMNS. THEY DID. AND, UM, POTENTIALLY, OR POSSIBLY NOT KNOWING WHO DID THE DRAWING OR WHO DID THE CONSTRUCTION. WHEN THEY CHANGED FROM THE SQUARE POSTS TO THE TURN POSTS MM-HMM. , THEY THEN DECIDED TO GO FROM THE SQUARE BALLISTERS TO THE TURNED BALLISTERS. SO IF WE'RE STAYING WITH THE TURNED POSTS, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE STAY WITH THE TURNED BALLISTERS. AND, AND I'M AGREEING TO YOUR STIPULATIONS. I JUST HAD THOUGHT, OH, I HAVE DOCUMENTATION. THAT'S INTERESTING. SO I THOUGHT, WELL, LET'S JUST TRY THAT. 'CAUSE THAT LOOKS RIGHT TOO. SO I'VE SEEN, THERE'S PLENTY OF HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE TURNED POSTS AND STRAIGHT BA STRAITS. IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S ALL A MIX UP. WHO'S GOT WHAT. SO ANYWAY, THAT WAS JUST MY APPLICATION, BUT I WILL HAPPILY ACCEPT YOUR TURNED RECOMMENDATIONS. I'VE REPLACED THEM BEFORE. I'LL REPLACE THEM AGAIN. UH, DO WE, IF YOU WOULD ACTUALLY NEED A MOTION ON THIS OR COULD IT JUST BE A REPAIR MAINTENANCE? LET THE, THE, THE APPLICANT CAN ACTUALLY WITHDRAW. RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'LL BE REPAIRING KIND AND YOU CAN JUST GET IN STRAIGHT BLUE. BUT IF YOU DO WANNA SHOW US EXAMPLES IN YOUR STREET OR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES THAT DO HAVE BOTH, WE COULD TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT. BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AGAIN. I, AND I AGREE WITH FELLOW COMMISSIONER HERE THAT THERE'S STYLE, UH, TRYING TO BE PARALLEL WITH EACH OTHER AND THE ALTERATION, IT'S ALMOST A CHOICE SQUARE POST SQUARE BAST, UH, YEAH, DETAILED MAGISTRATE DETAILED POST, YOU KNOW, AND I WAS PROBABLY MORE PERSUADED BY MY ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS BECAUSE THEY SHOWED A THIRD VARIATION. SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, JUST TRYING TO REPAIR THE PORCH. IT'S BEEN A VERY EDUCATIONAL AFTERNOON. I WITHDRAW MY REQUEST RESTRAINT, BALLASTS, AND RE REQUEST ONLY TO REPAIR, IS THAT THE RIGHT WORD? THE PORCH. SO STAFF CAN ISSUE AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL FOR, FOR THAT SCOPE. SO YOUR CASE MANAGER'S OVER HERE, YOUR CASE MANAGER STEPHANIE, WILL BE IN TOUCH WITH YOU FOR WHAT'S NEEDED NOW. SO WE DON'T NEED AN ACTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE APPRECIATE THE RESEARCH THAT YOU DID ON THE PROJECT AGENDA. ITEM [B-17 20-2154 Address/Description: 124 ADAMS ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-060 Landmark Name: Wagner House #3 Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Nathan Manfred/French & Michigan Request: Window replacement City Council Dist.: 1] B 17 H G R S C CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH ZERO 60. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO REPLACE THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE REAR SUNROOM VOL SUNROOM VOLUME TO, UH, REMOVE TWO WINDOWS ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE SUNROOM VOLUME AND REPLACE THE REMAINING THREE WINDOWS ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE SUNROOM VOLUME. THE APPLICANT, UM, HAS PROPOSED TO REPLACE ALL EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE REAR SUNROOM VOLUME WITH ALUMINUM CLA WOOD PELLA ARCHITECT SERIES RESERVE WINDOWS. THE SUNROOM WAS ENCLOSED CIRCUIT 1975 TO 1980 WITH CONFIGURATION OF SIX PANE HISTORIC AGE SASH WINDOWS STACKED THREE SASHES HIGH AND INSTALLED AS FIXED WINDOWS. THERE ARE FIVE SETS OF THESE WINDOWS GANGED ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION, AND THREE SETS OF THESE WINDOWS. GANGED ON THE EAST ELEVATION. STAFF PERFORMED A SITE VISIT ON FEBRUARY 7TH, 2020, AND DID NOT OBSERVE ANY SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE TO THE FIXED SUNROOM WINDOWS. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO GUIDELINES FOR EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE AND ALTERATIONS IN KIND, REPLACEMENT OF WINDOWS IS ONLY APPROPRIATE WHEN THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS ARE BEYOND REPAIR. STAFF DOES NOT FIND THAT THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE REAR SUNROOM VOLUME ARE ORIGINAL TO THE STRUCTURE. ALTHOUGH THEY ARE HISTORIC AGE STAFF FINDS REPLACEMENT APPROPRIATE FOR THE SECOND FLOOR SUNROOM. THE APPLICANT [02:20:01] HAS PROPOSED TO REPLACE THREE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE SUNROOM VOLUME WITH ALUMINUM CLOUD WOOD PELLA ARCHITECT SERIES RESERVE WINDOWS. UM, STAFF DID NOT OBSERVE ANY WOOD ROT OR WATER DAMAGE. OVERALL, THE WINDOWS WERE FOUND TO BE FULLY REPAIRABLE. STAFF DOES NOT FIND THE WINDOWS TO BE ORIGINAL TO THE STRUCTURE OR BEYOND REPAIR. REPLACEMENT OF ANY KIND IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO REMOVE TWO SOUTH FACING WINDOWS FROM THE SECOND FLOOR SUNROOM VOLUME AND INSTALL WOOD SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING IN ORDER TO CREATE A MORE USABLE INTERIOR SPACE. STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSAL INCONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. ITEM ONE, STAFF. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE REAR SUNROOM VOLUME BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH D WITH, UH, STAFF STANDARD WOOD WINDOW STIPULATIONS. ITEM TWO STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE REAR SUNROOM VOLUME BASED ON FINDING E IF AN ASSEMBLY IS DEEMED DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR BY THE H D R C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE NEW WINDOWS MEET THE STANDARD STAFF WOOD WINDOW, UM, STANDARDS. AND ITEM THREE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS BASED ON FINDING F. YES SIR. HI, I'M NATE MANFORD, IRA WITH FRENCH OF MICHIGAN, AND I'M REPRESENTING 1 24 ADAMS. UM, SO YES, THIS IS A WINDOW REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND, AND PART OF OUR REQUEST, WE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE TWO WINDOWS. UM, WE AGREE WITH THE STAFF STIPULATIONS FOR THE FIRST FLOOR FOR THE SUNROOM, BUT WE ARE STILL REQUESTING TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS ON THE SECOND FLOOR. THIS VOLUME WAS AT ONE POINT, UH, AN EXTERIOR SPACE, AN UPSTAIRS AND DOWNSTAIRS EXTERIOR PORCH THAT WAS ENCLOSED AT SOME POINT. I, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN. UM, AND WHEN IT WAS ENCLOSED, IT WAS A ENCLOSED UPPER FLOOR AND A DOWNSTAIRS, OR THE, WHERE THE SUNROOM IS, WAS A SCREEN PORCH, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTO. AT SOME POINT THAT WAS ALSO ENCLOSED AND THESE, UH, FIXED STACKED SASHES WERE INSTALLED. UM, OUR REQUEST FOR THE SECOND FLOOR IS THAT THOSE WINDOWS WERE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE. THEY'RE NOT HISTORIC WEIGHTED WINDOWS. YES, THEY ARE WOOD WINDOWS. UH, THEY DON'T CLOSE COMPLETELY. UM, AND THEY'RE IN FIXED POSITION. UM, AND FOR THE REQUEST FOR REMOVING THE TWO WINDOWS ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION, JUST SO THAT THE OWNERS CAN BETTER USE THAT SPACE AS A FUNCTIONAL SPACE. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT REQUEST IS COMING FROM. UM, WOOD WINDOWS FOR THE FIRST FLOOR. I THINK WE CAN ACCOMMODATE THAT. UM, WE WERE HOPING FOR CLAD JUST BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS WAS NOT AN ORIGINAL PORCH ENCLOSED PART OF THE BUILDING, IT'S ON THE BACK, DOESN'T GET A LOT OF VIEW. THE SECOND FLOOR WINDOWS PARTICULARLY HAVE NEW WOOD SCREENS THAT WE HAD PUT IN, BUILT AND INSTALLED ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO. THE, THOSE SCREENS WILL REMAIN. UM, THE WINDOWS THAT ARE GONNA GO IN AND OUT ARE NOT GONNA AFFECT ANY EXTERIOR WORK. THEY'RE BASICALLY GONNA BE POP-IN REPLACEMENT WINDOWS BY PELLA. UM, SO WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE TO DISTURB ANY OF THE EXTERIOR TRIM OR ANY OF THAT IN INFO, YOU KNOW, OUR ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS. AND SO YEAH, THAT'S THE BASIS OF WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING. SO CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT THE PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION AND WHY THOSE, THE BASE OF THOSE WINDOWS IS BEING RAISED? UM, LOOKS ABOUT LIKE THREE FEET. YEAH, THAT IS A WALL WHERE FURNITURE IS PLACED AND THE OWNERS DIDN'T WANNA RISK. THEY'VE ALREADY BROKEN A FEW PANES OF GLASS IN THOSE FIXED WINDOWS, WHICH WE'VE REPLACED OVER TIME. SO THEY WANTED TO PUT NEW WINDOWS IN AND THEN PUT SOME FURNITURE UP AGAINST THERE. THE OTHER PART IS STARTED OUT AS A LITTLE BIT OF PRIVACY. THAT'S NOT REALLY A GOOD ARGUMENT HERE BECAUSE THE WINDOWS ARE STILL PRETTY LARGE. THEIR NEIGHBORS NEXT DOOR, TWO STORY HOUSE AND LOOKED DOWN. BUT THAT'S ALL MITIGATED WITH BLINDS. AND SO THAT'S NOT REALLY AN ISSUE ANYMORE. BUT, UM, THAT'S REALLY THE CRUX OF IT IS BECAUSE THAT WALL, YOU KNOW, HAS SOME FURNITURE AGAINST IT AND JUST DIDN'T WANNA BUMP OR BREAK ANYTHING. SO, SO I THINK STAFF HAS THIS ONE RIGHT, AS FAR AS THE REPLACEMENT, UM, BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR THE SUNROOM, BUT, UH, NOT FOR THE SECOND STORY AND TO REPAIR THOSE IN PLACE. UM, AND THE ONES THAT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED WOULD BE THE, THE WOOD WINDOWS. SO I, I THINK STAFF HAS THIS RIGHT? UH, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. I AGREE. OH, I'M SORRY. WHAT ARE YOU CLARIFY THAT? YEAH, SO, SO I WOULD, UH, MOVE FOR, UM, APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE AS STIPULATED BY STAFF, UM, NOT APPROVING ITEM [02:25:01] TWO. UM, AND THEN NOT APPROVING THE MODIFICATIONS IN ITEM THREE. SECOND. MOTION TO SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. AGENDA [B-18 20-2134 Address/Description: 215 E ROSEWOOD AVE HDRC Case No.: 2020-058 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: Jim Weynand Request: Window replacement City Council Dist.: 1] ITEM B 18 H G R C CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 0 5 8 2 15 EAST ROSEWOOD AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO REPLACE EXISTING WINDOWS WITH NEW WINDOWS. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO REPLACE 28 WOOD WINDOWS WITH, UH, PELLA ARCHITECT SERIES RESERVED WOOD WINDOWS STAFF PERFORMED A SITE VISIT TO THE PROPERTY ON FEBRUARY 10TH, 2020. DURING THE STAFF VISIT, STAFF OBSERVED THE FOLLOWING DAMAGE TO THE WINDOWS PAINT, PEELING OR CHIPPING, DAMAGED OR MISSING CORDS, MISSING WEIGHTS, MINOR WOOD ROTT MISSING SEAL TRACKS, CRACKED GLASS SASHES LOOSE IN WINDOW FRAMES. MANY WINDOWS ARE CURRENTLY INOPERABLE. STAFF DID NOT OBSERVE ANY SIGNIFICANT WOOD ROTT OR WOOD DAMAGE ON THE WINDOWS. HOWEVER, THERE IS SIGNIFICANT WOOD ROTT AND WATER DAMAGE BENEATH GANGED WINDOWS NUMBER 13 AND 14 ON THE FRONT FACADE. OVERALL, THE WINDOWS WERE FOUND TO BE FULLY REPAIRABLE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS. A THROUGH C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT REPAIR THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS IN PLACE. IF AN ASSEMBLY IS DEEMED DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR BY THE H D R C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE NEW W WINDOWS MEET THE STAFF STANDARD WINDOW STIPULATIONS OF THE APPLICANT. AND THEN WE DO HAVE, UM, CITIZEN TO BE HEARD. UH, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JIM WYAN AND I'M REPRESENTING TWO 15 EAST ROSEWOOD WENDELL REPLACEMENT. UM, WE TOOK ON THIS PROJECT AS A SIMPLE REMODEL AND WHEN WE GOT INTO THE PROJECT AND STARTED REMOVING SOME OF THE SHEET ROCK AND INSIDE PLASTER, WE NOTICED A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF INSIDE WALL DAMAGE WHERE THE INSIDE WOOD SIDING HAS ROTTED AWAY AND THE EXTERIOR ROCK IS JUST EXPOSED AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT HAS TURNED INTO A KIND OF A HEALTH SITUATION FOR THE OWNER ON TRYING TO RESEAL THIS HOME TO KEEP OUT THE PENETRATION OF THE WATER IN THIS HOME. THERE'S NO SOFFITS ON THE EXTERIOR ROOF LINE. SO THE ROOF IS BASICALLY DRIPPING ON THE EDGE OF THE ROCK AND RUNNING DOWN INTO THE WINDOW AREA, CREATING A WATER ENTRY AROUND THE WINDOWS. ALL THE WINDOW FRAMING AROUND THESE WINDOWS REALISTICALLY HAS TO BE REMOVED AND RESEALED TO KEEP THE WATER FROM PENETRATING INTO THE WINDOW. YES, IT'S CONSIDERED THAT THE WINDOWS BE REPAIRED AND REBUILT AS LONG AS THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE. TO START WITH, THERE'S SOME ALUMINUM WINDOWS IN THE UPPER AREAS, ONE ON THE EAST SIDE AND ONE ON THE WEST SIDE, WHICH IS NOT A HISTORICAL VALUE AND NOT A HISTORICAL TRAIT. THAT WINDOW CANNOT BE REBUILT AND SHOULD NOT BE MADE TO STAY. WE'RE PROPOSING A WINDOW THERE THAT IS LESS IN WIDTH AND HIGHER IN HEIGHT. TO BRING THAT MORE INTO THE HISTORICAL HISTORICAL GUIDELINES, CAN YOU JUST SHOW US WHICH WINDOW IT IS ON THE WINDOW SCHEDULE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED? I'D? I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD, WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT TYPE OF WINDOW REPLACEMENT, IF YOU'RE GOING TO, UH, MINIMIZE THE WIDTH, I THINK THAT GENERALLY WE CAN GET BEHIND THAT BECAUSE THE FRAMING DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ALTERED DRAMATICALLY, BUT WHENEVER YOU TALK ABOUT GOING BEYOND THE WIDTH OR GOING BEYOND THE HEIGHT, THEN YOU HAVE TO START CHANGING HEADERS OR THINGS LIKE THAT. SO WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE, AND THIS MIGHT BE A CONVERSATION FOR A POTENTIAL SITE VISIT, UM, CONSIDERING THERE'S CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE TO THE STRUCTURE, BUT I THINK THAT, UM, IF THE HEADER WAS ALREADY PREEXISTING AND YOU WEREN'T GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE THERE OR THE, THE FACADE ELEMENTS OR THAT FACADE ELEMENT WAS DAMAGED AND WAS GONNA HAVE TO BE REPLACED ANYWAY, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GENERALLY TALK TOWARDS. BUT, UM, CONSIDERING THE COMPLEXITY OF THAT, I WOULD SAY THAT THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE BEST VIEWED AT A D R C SITE VISIT. MR. WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED IN, UH, PATRICIA SEIDENBERG. SIR, IF YOU'LL JUST HAVE A SEAT RIGHT THERE. UM, WE'RE GONNA HAVE OUR SPEAKER, THREE MINUTES [02:30:01] MAX PATRICIA SEIDENBERG, 1 1 4 1 8 HOLLOW TREE STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2 1 5 EAST ROSEWOOD AVENUE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH A FELLOW COMMISSIONER THAT THIS MAY, UM, BETTER DISCUSSED AND, AND VIEWED, UH, WITH A, UH, SITE VISIT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT THIS, UH, CASE BE DEFERRED TO THE, UH, OR REFERRED TO THE D R C SITE VISIT. SECOND ON MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. SO STAFF WILL GET IN TOUCH WITH YOU AND ARRANGE FOR, UH, A D R C UH, DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. SEVERAL OF THE COMMISSIONERS WILL COME OUT AND LOOK AT THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AGENDA ITEM [B-19 20-2146 Address/Description: 311 REFUGIO ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-068 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Brian Voges/Voges Design Request: New construction City Council Dist.: 1] B 19 H J R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 0 6 8 3 11 RIO STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT TWO TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AT THE PARCEL ADDRESS. THREE 11 REIO, THE TWO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES WILL FRONT LAVACCA STREET. THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES A CONNECTED ONE STORY FOUR CAR GARAGE STRUCTURE FRONTING REIO DAFT. DOES NOT RECOMMEND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH Q STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING, ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT RECONFIGURES THE OVERALL SITE DESIGN TO PROPOSE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES THAT ADDRESS BOTH RIO AND LAVACCA. AS NOTED IN FINDINGS DE AND F, THE CURRENT SITE CONFIGURATION IS NOT APPROPRIATE. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION THAT LOCATES DRIVEWAYS ON THE SIDES OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES IN LIEU OF A FOUR CAR GARAGE FRONTING A PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL STREET AS NOTED IN FINDING N THREE THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES MASSING ENTRANCE AND ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS THAT ARE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND PRECEDENTS IN THE DISTRICT AS NOTED OF FINDINGS, EEF AND M THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT A SETBACK DIAGRAM TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL, NOTING THAT PROPOSED SETBACKS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. AND FIVE, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT FINAL WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROPOSED REPLACEMENT WINDOWS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE STANDARD WINDOW STIPULATIONS. UM, AS A CASE COMMENT, THE APPLICANT'S CASE WAS HEARD BY THE H D R C ON JULY 17TH, 2019. THE APPLICANT RECEIVED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS TO CONSTRUCT FOUR TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE LOT AT THREE 11 REIO WITH RESIDENTIAL FRONTAGE ON BOTH REFU RIO AND LAVACCA STREETS. THE PROPOSAL INCLUDED DRIVEWAYS ON THE SIDE OF EACH RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE. THE APPLICANT HAS ADDRESSED PREVIOUS STAFF STIPULATIONS TO EXPLORE ALTERNATIVES TO THE ATTACHED, TO ATTACH THE TWO GROUPS OF BUILDINGS AND TO INCORPORATE RIBBON DRIVEWAYS IN THE UPDATED PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, THE PROPOSAL HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANTLY MODIFIED TO FEATURE ONLY RESIDENTIAL ACT ACCESS FROM LAVACCA STREET AND GARAGE FRONTAGE ALONG WHERE FURIO STREET THE APPLICANT IS, UM, SEEKING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR THE UPDATED PROPOSAL. THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO SUBMITTED, UM, DOCUMENTATION TO ADDRESS STAFF STIPULATIONS THAT'S AVAILABLE IN THE LATE FOLDER. GOOD AFTERNOON. BRIAN VARGAS, THREE 11 GIO. UM, AS SHE MENTIONED, WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE FOR A PREVIOUS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. UM, WE KIND OF CHANGED DIRECTIONS A LITTLE BIT BASED ON OUR DESIGN. UM, SOME OF THE STAFF OR THE ACTUAL COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS ORIGINALLY HAD BEEN TO COMBINE THE BUILDINGS AND, UM, KIND OF WORK WITH SOME MASSING. SO I THINK OUR, THIS DESIGN WENT FROM BASICALLY FOUR STRUCTURES ON THE, ON THE PROPERTY TO, TO, UM, ADJOINING RESIDENCES. SO THIS KIND OF CHANGED OUR ORIENTATION OF OUR PARKING, UH, TO REFUSE STREET AND THEN FACING LAVACCA AS THE FRONT OF THE HOME. OUR KIND OF DESIGN CON CONCEPT WAS TO KIND OF MAKE THAT REAR STRUCTURE LIKE A CARRIAGE HOUSE, HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE, UH, STRUCTURE. UH, WE KIND OF PLAYED WITH THE IDEA OF OF CONNECTING THEM WITH A CORRIDOR THAT KINDA LOOKED OUT INTO THE BACKYARD AND THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER. SO, UM, IN TERMS OF THE FINDINGS, UH, WE ARE WITHIN SETBACKS. WE KNOW WE HAVE TO HAVE OUR WINDOWS SUBMITTED AND OUR SETBACKS ARE, UH, STIPULATED BASED ON OUR LAST, UH, OUR LAST CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. SO IN TERMS OF THE MASSING, WE KNOW THAT WE WERE WILLING TO WORK WITH THAT. AND I THINK BASED ON OUR LAST APPROVAL AND SOME OF THE DESIGN, WE KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WORK O WORK THROUGH D R C WITH THAT. UH, BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST CONS REQUESTING A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL BASED ON JUST THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN, UH, SHOWING THE TWO BUILDINGS TOGETHER. AND THAT'S THIS ORIENTATION. [02:35:02] OKAY. BEFORE WE, UH, GET INTO COMMISSION COMMENTS, WE DO HAVE CITIZENS TO BE HEARD. PATRICIA SEIDENBERG, PATRICIA SEIDENBERG, 1 1 4 1 8 HOLLOW TREE STREET, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO OBJECTS TO THE PROPOSED ORIENTATION OF THE INFIELD CONSTRUCTION ON THIS LOT. THE PROJECT SHOULD FOLLOW THE HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AS SHOWN ON THE SANBORN MAP AND WITH ONE RESIDENT FACING REFUGIO STREET AND THE OTHER FACING LAVACCA STREET. IN ADDITION, WE SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION STAFF REGARDING THE USE OF MASSING ENTRANCE AND ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS THAT ARE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT'S PREVIOUS FACADE DESIGN FOR THE RESIDENCES CAME CLOSER TO ACHIEVING THIS GOAL, UH, RESPECTFULLY COMMITTED THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UH, MR. CHAIRMAN MM-HMM. , UM, THE, UM, COMMENT, I THINK IT'S, THE FIRST COMMENT IS A CONTRADICTION, RIGHT? TO WHAT, WHAT WOULD'VE BEEN A COMMITTEE MEETING THAT THAT HELPED YIELD THE, THE DESIGN THAT IS BEFORE US TODAY? RIGHT? LIKE, LIKE THE PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL WOULD'VE BEEN CONSISTENT WITH ITEM ONE, BUT THEN THEY HAD A MEETING WITH THE COMMITTEE AND NOW THEY HAVE A SOLUTION THAT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH ITEM ONE. WOULD THAT BE CORRECT? NO, NO, NO. WELL, SOMEWHAT RIGHT. WELL, NO. SO THIS IS A NEW PROPOSAL FROM THE CLIENT, I MEAN FROM THE, UH, APPLICANT. RIGHT. UM, COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT OF H D R C RECOMMENDATIONS, RIGHT? RIGHT. IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH. CORRECT. WE, YEAH, WE ORIGINALLY HAD A, HAD A, A ORIGINAL PROPOSAL THAT HAD FOUR STRUCTURES, FOUR INDIVIDUAL FAMILY HOMES, TWO FACING FU, TWO FACING VODKA. RIGHT. SO WE CHANGED THAT, BUT HAVING THEM CONNECTED, I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT, THAT THEY'RE CONNECTED AND THAT TO THE MIDDLE, THAT WAS THE COT THAT CAME OUT OF THE YEAH, ORIGINALLY WE HAD A SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS, LIKE ON THE SCREEN HERE. SO WE HAD BASICALLY A THREE FOOT CORRIDOR IN BETWEEN THEM TWO FACING, YOU STILL HAVE TWO FACING EACH WAY. NOT THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S FACING, NOT THE PARKING GARAGE, GARAGES FACING ROOF. NOW WE HAVE A, NOW WE HAVE A PARKING STRUCTURE TOWARDS THE REAR. OKAY. NO, MY QUESTION IS, YOU PROBABLY SHOULD ASKED YOU THE, THE FACT THAT YOU PUT 'EM TOGETHER, RIGHT? MM-HMM. THAT CAME OUT OF, WHAT, DID THAT COME OUT OF AN H D R C COMMITTEE MEETING? THAT CORRECT? THAT WAS AN ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. SO FROM COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AND COMMISSIONER GRUB AND OUR ORIGINAL D R C FROM OUR LAST PROPOSAL BACK IN JULY. OKAY. SO THEN OF 19 AND, AND BEFORE THAT IT, YOUR PREVIOUS DESIGN WOULD'VE BEEN MORE CONSISTENT WITH ITEM ONE, RIGHT? LIKE THE YEAH, WITH THE TWO. WITH THE TWO, UH, YEAH. WITH ONE, WITH TWO STRUCTURES FACING EACH DIRECTION. EACH STREET. CORRECT. OKAY. BUT WE KIND OF TOOK SOME OF THE ELEMENTS FROM THAT, FROM THOSE DRCS AND WE KIND OF INCORPORATED THEM. LEMME JUST REPHRASE AND LEMME JUST A LITTLE BIT REFRESH EVERYBODY'S MEMORY. I KIND OF NOT SAY LIKE REJOINED THEM AS PRESENTED TODAY. THE REASON WHY WAS, UM, THERE'S HOW MUCH IN THAT DESIGN, HOW MUCH WAS THE, IN BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS? I DON'T REMEMBER. LIKE THREE, THREE FEET? YEAH. YEAH. IT, IT'S THREE FEET. YEAH. IT WAS THREE FEET. BORING ME. WAS THOSE THREE FEET WHAT THEY WOULD CAUSE IN THE FUTURE? CORRECT. JUST REMAINING THOSE THREE FEET. YES. NOT TO DOING ONE LONG BUILDING DOWN. UM, SO I DO TEND TO AGREE WITH STAFF THAT MAYBE IT'S TOO MUCH. UH, THERE'S, THERE'S A PROJECT. WE HAVE NOT SEEN THIS IN D R C, UH, JUST FOR CONCEPTUAL, I THINK, UM, I THINK THIS WOULD BE IDEAL EVEN BEFORE CONCEPTUAL TO ACTUALLY HAVE A D R C I WOULD'VE RECOMMENDED THAT SO WE COULD HAVE THAT OPEN DISCUSSION. WE TRIED, BUT ONCE AGAIN, WE WERE OH, WE DIDN'T, WE WERE ONE OF THOSE DIDN OKAY. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. SO I WOULD, I WOULD DEFINITELY, UM, WELL, WE, WE KNOW WE LOOK FORWARD TO IT AND WE WANNA WORK WITH D R C ON THE DEVELOP ON THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT. RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN, LIKE A GUIDANCE, BUT IT'S, THAT'S CONSENT. WHAT'S THE LOT COVERAGE? 50%. 50. HOLD. I DIDN'T FINISH MY COMMENTS FROM THE OH, A SECOND AGO. I, I MEAN, UM, IT, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE'RE HEADED TOWARD KIND OF LIKE A CAR CRASH HERE, RIGHT? BECAUSE LIKE THE LADY FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY WAS SAYING ON THE PARKING GARAGE FACING ONE SIDE AND THE ENTRANCES TO THE HOUSE ON THE OTHER, AND THAT YOU CAME UP WITH THE SOLUTION BASED ON MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW, MISINTERPRETATION OR MAYBE, UH, WHATEVER THE, THE MASSING THAT CREATED ONE BIG MASS, RIGHT? IT, I'M, I'M JUST WORRIED THAT YOU WOULD GO BACK TO THE DRAWING TABLE TO FIX [02:40:01] SOMETHING THAT FUNDAMENTALLY IS GOT A DIFFERENT PROBLEM, RIGHT? WHICH IS A FRONT ON ONE SIDE AND A PARKING GARAGE ON ANOTHER SIDE. AND WELL, YOU DO SEE THIS IN, ON THOSE TWO STREETS THROUGHOUT, THERE'S A COUPLE INSTANCES LIKE WE'VE PROVIDED TODAY WHERE THERE ARE HOUSES WITH GARAGES FRONTING GIO. SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT AN UNCOMMON, AND I DON'T DISAGREE. I I'M, I'M, AND FUNDAMENTALLY I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU. IT'S JUST THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE ON ONE STREET VERSUS THE OTHER STREET, RIGHT. THAT THAT'S AMASSING ACROSS AND THAT THERE'S FOUR APARTMENTS. IT'S NOT ONE HOUSE. RIGHT. IT'S, IT'S A PARTICULAR ANIMAL IN ITSELF, RIGHT? IT'S TWO UNITS NOW. WELL, TWO UNITS, BUT TWO, TWO SEPARATE. TWO SEPARATE. UH, IT'S NOT ONE, ONE OWNER, ONE, ONE DWELLING, ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. IT'S, IT'S TWO SOMETHINGS OR FOURSOME, WHATEVER IT IS. IT'S A COMBINATION OF THINGS UN UNREAL IN A WAY. UNRELATED TO EACH OTHER. RIGHT? UM, YEAH. SO I MEAN, THE, THE, THE LAST CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING NOW. I MEAN, THERE'S SOME INSTANCES WHERE THERE WERE SOME DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT WERE, HAD A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION THAT WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION WITH THIS DESIGN, BUT THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED WHATSOEVER. I MEAN, THIS IS A SEPARATE DESIGN. WE'RE WE'RE PROPOSING JUST TWO STRUCTURES. ONE FA THE FRONT FACING LAVACCA AND THE REAR GARAGE. J I JUST GOT IN, IN TERMS OF, IN TERMS OF THE CONCEPTUAL OR, OR THE RELATED IMAGES AND STYLISTIC AND ALL THAT. I MEAN, THE, THE PALLET IS PRETTY, PRETTY WIDE THERE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT DESIGN AND A LOT OF THINGS TO CONTRADICT WHATEVER A, A RULE WOULD BE. RIGHT? BUT IN TERMS OF, I, I'M JUST WORRIED THAT YOU WOULD GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND YOU'D BE COMING BACK 15 TIMES BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T BE ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT PARKING ON ONE STREET. AND THERE WAS A REASON WE CHANGED IT. UH, MY NAME'S HOUSTON CARPENTER, FOUR 15 CEDAR STREET. I USED TO LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS. I OWN THE LAND AS WELL. I'M FRIENDS WITH EVERYONE ON THAT STREET, AND I'VE TALKED TO ALL OF THEM. AND WE DECIDED NOT TO DO TWO UNITS S FACING GIO BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A NARROW STREET, AND IT WOULD'VE CAUSED CONGESTION IN AN ALREADY CONGESTED STREET. SO WE DECIDED JUST TO DO TWO HOMES FACING LAVACCA, A MUCH WIDER STREET. THE GARAGES ON THE BACK WOULD ALSO HELP, I THINK THE CONGESTION. I, WE DID THIS NOT TO MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL MONEY. IF ANYTHING, WE'RE LOSING SOME, WE DID IT TO APPEASE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THIS MASSING THIS IS VERY CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE STREET. THERE'S A LOT OF HOMES SIMILAR. WE DID THIS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, MY, MY NEIGHBORHOOD. WELL, UNFORTUNATELY WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET, Y'ALL HAVE A D R C FOR WHATEVER REASON. UH, BUT I THINK I WOULD AGREE WITH FELLOW COMMISSIONER THAT THIS IS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. AND YOU HAVE SOME, UH, COMPELLING, UH, REASONS FOR THE NEW DESIGN. BUT I, I THINK THIS WOULD BEST BE, UH, APPROACHED IN THE, IN A D R C AND WE WILL MAKE THAT, UH, HAPPEN AND SOME FORM OF COMMITMENT FROM I, I AND I, I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER. I THINK THAT, UH, UH, JUST SOME, SOME DIRECTIONAL, UH, STUFF FOR THAT MEETING TO GET PREPARED FOR THAT WOULD BE MAYBE SOME OPTIONS THAT SHOW, UH, DIFFERENT SIZE FOOTPRINTS FOR THE MAIN TWO STRUCTURES, NOT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. BUT USUALLY WHEN WE SEE THESE, UM, THERE'S A MAIN STRUCTURE AND AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, THAT DOESN'T REALLY SEEM TO BE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PATTERN. SO I'D ALSO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PATTERN AND SEE WHAT THAT, UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A HOUSE TWO HOUSES DOWN THAT'S SIMILAR. I SEEN WE SUBMITTED AS WELL ALONG WITH THIS. AND THERE IS A EXPLANATION FOR EACH OF Y'ALL'S FINDINGS. I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL, IF Y'ALL SAW ALL THE ATTACHMENT, IF, AND, AND WE, WE HAVE YOUR PACKAGE HERE. I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT FOR THE D R C THAT YOU GUYS HAVE SOME DIRECTION ON US AS TO WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING FOR AS FAR AS SCALE FOOTPRINT FIRST. FIRST, THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, UM, THE SCALE, THE FOOTPRINT LOT COVERAGE. THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT HERE. HEIGHTS, ROOF FORMS. SO THEY'RE DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PROPOSED BEFORE. SO, YOU KNOW, MY COMMISSIONERS I THINK HAVE THIS RIGHT. UH, THEY ARE THE, THE D R C IS GONNA BE WHERE YOU CAN MAKE THE MOST PROGRESS ON THIS. YEAH, I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THAT. I MEAN, WELL, ARE Y'ALL PROPOSING THAT OUR LAST, UH, OUR LAST SUBMISSION WAS BETTER THAN, I MEAN, WE WE'RE TRYING TO COMBINE THE BUILDINGS? NO, I THINK WE'RE SAYING THAT ONE'S BETTER THAN THE OTHER, BUT IT'S JUST THAT Y'ALL HAVE MADE SOME, UH, SIGNIFICANT CHANGES BASED ON DEALING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOUR PROGRAM AND ALL THAT. AND, UM, IT'S SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH THAT I WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH GIVING CONCEPTUAL HERE WITHOUT HAVING A D R C I. I GUESS IF I COULD SHARE MAYBE MY CONCERNS THAT THE APPLICANTS HAVE IS THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE TRYING TO ENGAGE THEMSELVES IN THE PROCESS AS BEST THEY CAN, AND SEEMS LIKE THEY TOOK A STEP FORWARD [02:45:01] AND NOW THEY'RE TAKING A STEP BACK. AND SO I GUESS I, I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY YOU GUYS WERE GETTING FRUSTRATED. WELL, IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A DIFFERENT APPROACH. I MEAN, WE, WE JUST WENT FROM FOUR UNITS TO TWO. 'CAUSE WE THOUGHT, I MEAN, JUST REALISTICALLY FROM OUR LAST PROJECT THAT WE DID, UM, OFF PRESSA, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO JUST DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. SO IT'S VERY SIMILAR. IT'S JUST TWO NOW. WELL, AND, AND LET, LET ME JUST, YOU KNOW, MY, MY RED LIGHT THAT WENT OFF WAS NOT REALLY ON THIS SIDE. IT WAS MORE FOR Y'ALL BECAUSE I, I, I'D HATE TO SEE Y'ALL GO BACK AND FORTH. UM, THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE HERE, I THINK THEY'RE SPOT ON THAT Y'ALL WOULD DO REALLY WELL TO GO TO THE, TO THE COMMITTEE. DEFINITELY. WE, WE GO BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET A D R C MEETING. SO THAT'S, WELL, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO, IT COULD BE IN THE, IT WOULD BE IN THE MOTION MEETING. WERE Y Y'ALL SCHEDULED OR ORIGINALLY FOR LAST WEEK, CORRECT? YES, THERE WAS A SCHEDULED MEETING AND WE COULDN'T GET ANY COMMISSIONERS TO SHOW UP FOR WHATEVER REASON. I'M NOT SURE WHAT COULD BE REACHED AT THE, AT THE D R C THAT WE CAN'T ADDRESS RIGHT NOW. CAN YOU GIVE US STIPULATIONS? YOU GAVE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO TERRAMARK. AND THAT THING IS, I MEAN, COME ON, THAT'S DRASTIC. WE HAD FOUR D R C MEETINGS BEFORE THIS. WE'VE HAD, WE'VE HAD LIKE THREE AND WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE TRIED AND YEAH, BUT THOSE, THOSE CO CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO GO TO THE NEXT LEVEL. YEAH, THAT ONE, THE, THE ONE THAT YOU HAD THOSE D RRC MEETINGS GOT CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AND YOU CAME BACK AND CHANGED THE DESIGN DRASTICALLY. SO WE CAN'T JUST, WE, WE WOULD LOVE TO MOVE FORWARD AND, AND HAVE TO HAVE SEEN WHAT YOU GUYS HAD PREVIOUSLY MOVE FORWARD TO FINAL DESIGN TODAY. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, WHENEVER YOU GUYS TAKE A CHANGE IN DIRECTIONS, WE HAVE TO RESPOND. AND, AND SO WE, WE REALLY TRUST ME, I, I WANT YOU GUYS TO, TO GET MOVE FORWARD AND SUCCEED. AND WE WANT THIS TO BE SUCCESSFUL. UNFORTUNATELY, IF, IF, IF TODAY, IF WHAT YOU HAD PRESENTED WAS ON THE MONEY ACCEPTABLE, WE WOULD'VE ACCEPTED IT, BUT IT'S NOT. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO HELP YOU GET THERE. THERE'S NOTHING WE COULD CHANGE RIGHT NOW AND AGREE TO WITH STIPULATIONS. I MEAN, WE, WE CAN'T APPROVE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH, WITH SOMETHING THAT'S PRESENTED ON THE TABLE. THAT'S JUST FUNDA FUNDAMENTALLY NOT ACCEPTABLE. LET, LET'S BE HONEST HERE, LET'S GO BACK TO THAT PROJECT. YOU, YOU WERE THE SAME WAY. AND YOU COULD NOT ACCEPT LEAVING THIS MEETING WITHOUT A DECISION IN D R C. WE WERE ABLE TO TALK AND, AND GO BACK AND FORTH WITH IDEAS. SO I THINK THAT YOU SHOULD RESPECT THAT AND WE'LL GO BACK. I KNOW THAT I AM SORRY THAT NOBODY COULD, WAS ABLE TO MEET WITH YOU LAST WEEK. UM, IT HAPPENS. I THINK THIS IS A PRETTY IMPORTANT INVESTMENT FOR YOU AND, AND TIME. WE'RE ALSO VOLUNTEERS. SO I THINK THAT LET'S GET IT RIGHT, AND, AND I THINK THAT INFORMAL CONVERSATION THAT WE CAN HAVE IN DESIGN REVIEW WILL GET YOU ON THE RIGHT PATH. WELL, WELL THEN LET ME GIVE YOU THIS, THE KIND OF THE SPIRIT OF, OF, OF MY COMMENTS, AND HOPEFULLY MAYBE I CAN ISSUE A SOFT CHALLENGE TO COMMISSIONERS. WE DO HAVE OTHER, HERE, I'M RECOGNIZING THAT, I'M RECOGNIZING THAT THAT PERSONALLY, RIGHT? THAT Y'ALL, UH, UH, MADE ADJUSTMENTS AND THAT, THAT, THAT YOU WENT BACK AND THAT ESPECIALLY WHAT YOU SAID THAT YOU HAD THE FOUR AND THAT IT, YOU TALKED TO THE COMMUNITY THERE AND YOU'VE MADE THESE GREAT EFFORTS. I'M, I'M THINKING THAT, THAT THE EFFORTS THAT Y'ALL HAVE MADE SINCE THE LAST, UH, UH, UH, D R C MEETING THAT Y'ALL HAVE REALLY MOVED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, RIGHT? SO MY COMMENTS ARE NOT ABOUT THE, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AND ALL THAT. 'CAUSE THERE'S A A GREAT OPEN PALETTE OF CHOICES OUT THERE, BUT I I, I KIND OF FEEL IN THE SPIRIT THAT I'M FEELING FROM EVERYONE HERE, ESPECIALLY FROM, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, THAT, UM, WE, WE DON'T WANT YOU CONFUSED, BUT TO GET TOGETHER AND JUST WORK OUT THESE PIECES IN THE MASSING, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE IT BREAKS UP AS IT GOES DOWN TO THE SIDES. UM, I MEAN, YOU, YOU, YOU, YOU'VE MADE SOME CHANGES AND, AND THE WORST THING WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD COME BACK AND THEN WE WOULD STILL NOT BE ON THE SAME PAGE. BUT I THINK THAT YOU'RE, YOU, YOU'VE ALREADY MADE, UH, GOOD EFFORTS AND YOU'RE PROBABLY, UM, UH, JUST NEED TO FINE TUNE THOSE THINGS THAT MIGHT NOT BE, UM, UM, THE ONLY THING THAT MAKES ME FEEL WEIRD IS HOW, HOW THE THING CONTINUES FROM ONE SIDE WITHOUT A REAL BREAK. BUT I, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'VE GOT LIKE A, LIKE, ALMOST LIKE A BREEZEWAY BETWEEN YOUR, YOUR, YOUR GARAGE AND YOUR HOUSES OR WHATEVER, RIGHT? THAT, THAT ISN'T ONE STRAIGHT CONSISTENT LINE THROUGH IT. I'LL, I'LL TAKE THAT BREEZEWAY OUT IF Y'ALL WANT. . WELL, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S THE D R C C GO HAVE THAT. AND WE'LL ALL DO OUR BEST TO REMEMBER THAT WE WERE HERE WITH YOU AND THAT WE'RE MOVING IN THE DIRECTION OF, SO, OF GETTING YOU OUT HERE, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO, UH, MOVE FOR THIS TO GO TO THE D R C, BUT, UM, I WANNA JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I ACTUALLY APPRECIATE THE MOVE THAT YOU GUYS ARE GOING, YOU KNOW, DOING TWO UNITS RATHER THAN FOUR. I THINK THIS IS GONNA BE, UH, MORE ACCEPTABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ULTIMATELY ONE, UH, REQUEST I HAVE FOR THAT D R C MEETING, I'LL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO BE THERE FOR YOU GUYS. OKAY? IS CAN YOU COME WITH JUST EVEN A RUDIMENTARY LAYOUT OF HOW YOU'RE THINKING THE FLOOR PLAN'S GONNA WORK, WHETHER THAT IS INDOOR SPACE OR WHETHER THAT'S A CONNECTED BREEZEWAY MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW, MASSING WISE, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO, TO TELL THAT. AND, AND, AND THE SECOND THING I WANT YOU TO PONDER, AND IS IT NECESSARY [02:50:01] TO HAVE A FOUR UNIT GARAGE BACK THERE? WOULD THERE BE THE ABILITY TO HAVE TWO ENCLOSED GARAGE UNITS? YOU KNOW, ONE FOR EACH OF THE, OF THE TWO UNITS AND MAYBE SOME KIND OF CARPORT STRUCTURE THAT CAN ALSO SERVE AS A, LIKE AN OUTDOOR TRELLIS TYPE OF THING? AND THAT'S THE KIND OF DIALOGUE THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE IN THE, IN THE, IN THE D R C. SO THAT COULD BE MORE ACCEPTABLE. NOT FEEL LIKE IT'S THE, THE BACK END OF THE BUILDING, BUT IT'S JUST AS, UH, AS FRIENDLY A FACE AS THE FRONT END ON. YEAH, ONE OF OUR KIND OF DESIGN ELEMENTS WAS LIKE EVEN JUST, WE CREATED THAT CARRIAGE HOUSE A LITTLE BIT. WE TALKED ABOUT NOT EVEN HAVING THAT, HAVING A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS AND THE STRUCTURE ACTUALLY APPEAR AS A PARKING STRUCTURE AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A GARAGE OR SOMETHING. SO WE'RE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, KIND OF ADJUST THOSE ELEMENTS TO MAKE THAT LOOK MORE INVITING AND MORE FRONTING THE STREET. SO ALSO IF YOU COULD DO A, A, A LONGITUDINAL SECTION ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE SITE SO THAT WE CAN SHOW THE HEIGHTS ON ONE STREET VERSUS THE HEIGHTS ON THE OTHER, AS WELL AS, I COULDN'T TELL FROM ONE OF THE THREE D RENDERINGS HOW FAR THAT, UH, THE, THE MAIN HOUSE EXTENDS. AND IF THERE'S A SECOND STORY AND NOT A FIRST STORY, I, I WASN'T SURE HOW THAT WAS WORKING. SO IF YOU COULD JUST CLARIFY THAT, WE CAN LOOK THROUGH IT. SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE WAS A MOTION. I HOPE I CAN GET A SECOND, A SECOND MOTION A SECOND TO SEND THIS TO D R C. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK Y'ALL. APPRECIATE IT. THANKS GUYS. AGENDA ITEM B 20 [B-20 20-2158 Address/Description: 363 BRAHAN BLVD HDRC Case No.: 2020-048 Historic District Name: Westfort Applicant: ROSS BENLINE/BELLAIRE-HAGEN, LTD. Request: New construction City Council Dist.: 2] H D R C CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 0 4 8 3 6 3 BRAHAM BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A ONE STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH A DETACHED TWO CAR GARAGE AT 3 6 3. BRAHAM F RECOMMENDS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH O WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT FINAL WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLOUD WOOD WINDOWS FOR STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT MODIFY THE CURRENT FENESTRATION PATTERN TO REFLECT EXISTING FENESTRATION PATTERNS ON THE BLOCK. AS, AS NOTED IN FINDING J THREE, THAT THE PROPOSED STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF FEATURE PANELS THAT ARE 18 TO 21 INCHES WIDE. SEAMS THAT ARE ONE TO TWO INCHES HIGH, A CRIMPED RIDGE SEAM, AND A STANDARD GALVAO FINISH, A LOW PROFILE RIDGE CAP MAY BE USED, BUT SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THE APPLICANT HERE PLEASE NAME LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. MY NAME IS ROSS BELINE. I'M THE, UH, PARTNER IN BELLOR HAGEN. WE ARE THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE PROPERTY, UH, THE PROPOSED BUILD AT 360 3 BRAHE BOULEVARD FOR MR. J T BROWN. UH, HE APOLOGIZES THAT HE COULD NOT BE HERE THIS EVENING. HE HAD TO, UH, TAKE CARE OF SOME BUSINESS FOR HIS OWN COMPANY. SO I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, FIRST START WITH A VINYL WINDOWS. UM, I'VE SAT HERE THE NIGHT FOR THREE HOURS AND WATCHED A LOT OF, UH, UH, COMMENTS COME UP ABOUT WOOD WINDOWS AND WOOD REPLACEMENT WINDOWS. UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN BUILDING HOMES FOR 25 YEARS. UH, LAST WOOD WINDOW HOME I DID, UH, NINE YEARS LATER I GOT SUED AND THE MANUFACTURER PAID $30,000 AND WE PULLED ALL THE WINDOWS OUT OF THE HOME. IT WAS NOT PRETTY. I WOULD LIKE TO NOT DO THAT. UM, THIS IS NOT A NEW STRUCTURE, IT'S NOT A HISTORICAL STRUCTURE. UH, MR. BROWN IS A VERY INTELLIGENT MAN. HE HAS DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ABOUT WHAT HE WANTS IN HIS HOME, AND HE HAS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED VINYL WINDOWS FOR HIS HOME, UH, FOR THE LONG-TERM PERFORMANCE OF HIS HOME, THE LOOK OF THE FRONT ELEVATION, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT HE SEES IN THE SURROUNDING HOMES ON THAT PARTICULAR STREET DOES NOT HAPPEN TO HIS RESIDENCE. WHICH IF YOU'D MAKE A SITE VISIT, YOU WOULD SEE THAT THE WOOD WINDOWS, UH, EVEN THE, UH, ALUMINUM CLADDED WOOD WINDOWS DO NOT HOLD UP. UM, THEY'RE JUST NOT AS GOOD OF A PRODUCT. TIMES HAVE CHANGED A LITTLE BIT IN, IN MY OWN HOME BUILDING CAREER WHERE VINYL HAS BECOME THE PREDOMINANT WINDOW. SO I WOULD ASK THAT THE COMMISSION, UH, VOTES TO ACCEPT VINYL WINDOWS ON THE HOME. WE FEEL THAT THEY'RE A BETTER PRODUCT, MR. BROWN, AS THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD, UH, APPRECIATE YOUR APPROVAL OF THAT, UH, PRODUCT TO BE USED ON HIS PARTICULAR HOME, SINCE IT IS NOT A HISTORIC BUILDING OR REPLACEMENT OF A WINDOW. THE NEXT, UH, ITEM ON HIS LIST, UH, UH, ON THE LIST WAS THE, UH, PENETRATION. UH, I BROUGHT PICTURES FOR RACHEL. THESE ARE, THIS HOME IS IMMEDIATELY NEXT DOOR HAS AN ARCHED WINDOW. MR. BROWN IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE A SPANISH COLONIAL LOOK ON HIS HOME. UH, HE BELIEVES THAT THE ARCH WINDOW IS VERY AESTHETICALLY PLEASING AND IN LINE WITH THE, [02:55:01] UH, STREETSCAPE. THIS PARTICULAR HOME HAS AN ARCH WINDOW, IS, UH, LIKE THAT IS ACROSS THE STREET AND TWO DOORS DOWN, ALSO HAS AN ARCH WINDOW WITH TILE AROUND IT, WHICH IS WHAT HE WAS, IS ASKING US TO DO FOR HIM. SO THIS, THERE IS THE HOME IMMEDIATELY TO THE LEFT OF HIS, WITH AN ARCHED ALUMINUM WINDOW THAT IS THE, UH, HOME ACROSS THE STREET AND ABOUT TWO DOORS DOWN, WHICH IS ALSO AN ARCHED ALUMINUM WINDOW. THE HOME HAS, THE, THE STREET HAS A MIX OF WOOD WINDOWS AND ALUMINUM, UH, WINDOWS UP AND DOWN THE STREET. IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT A 50 50 MIX. UM, DON'T SEE ALUMINUM MUCH. UH, VINYL HAS KIND OF REPLACED THAT ANYWAY, AS A MORE ENERGY, UH, CONSCIOUS WINDOW. ALUMINUM JUST DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME U FACTOR, UH, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE ENERGY RATING. SO WE'D ASK THAT, UH, THAT THE COMMISSION PROOF, UH, AND AN ARCH WINDOW ON THE FRONT OF MR. BROWN'S HOME SO THAT HE CAN ACHIEVE THE SPANISH COLONIAL LOOK THAT HE WANTS, UH, ON HIS HOME. THEN IT TALKS ABOUT, UH, UH, THE RECESS ON THE WINDOWS. I THINK WE CAN ACHIEVE THAT, UH, WITH SOME BANDING AND SOME TILE. I THINK, UH, IF STAFF, IF YOU GUYS ARE OKAY WITH IT, WE CAN WORK WITH STAFF TO KIND OF ACHIEVE THAT, UH, RECESS LOOK ON THAT FRONT ARCH WINDOW, UH, PROVIDED THAT THAT'S APPROVED, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. UM, I THINK THAT'S FAIRLY EASY. AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, I THINK THE ONLY OTHER THING ON THERE IS THE, UM, ALUMINUM ROOF. UM, MR. BROWN, UH, HAS REQUESTED A METAL ROOF ON HIS HOME. UM, AGAIN, LONG-TERM PERFORMANCE, IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST PERFORMING ROOFS OUT THERE. UH, IT, IT, IT HOLDS ITS LOOK A LONG TIME. IT LOOKS GREAT ON HOMES. HE'S ASKED THAT WE DO THAT ON THIS HOME. THE, UH, I BROUGHT A SAMPLE OF WHAT THE STANDING SEAM ROOF LOOKS LIKE, SO STAFF CAN SEE THAT IT DOES MEET THE STANDARDS AND PANEL WIDTH AND, UH, THE, UH, THE DEPTH OF THE CRIMP. BUT, UH, MR. BROWN HAS REQUESTED A SPECIFIC COLOR CALLED COLONIAL RED. I BROUGHT A SAMPLE OF THAT, WHICH WAS ALSO SUBMITTED IN THE PACKAGE IF YOU WANT TO PROJECT THAT. UM, HE DOESN'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. UH, THE HOME DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET AND ONE DOOR DOWN HAS THE SAME ROOF ON IT. SO HE'S ASKED WHY WE CAN'T HAVE THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE STREET. UH, WE UNDERSTAND THE, HIS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE IN THE PRESERVATION OF THAT. WE RESPECT THAT IN THE COMMUNITY. UM, BUT AGAIN, HIS HOME IS, IS, UH, HE'S TRYING TO ACHIEVE A SPANISH COLONIAL LOOK, WHICH HE FEELS THAT WILL FIT IN VERY WELL WITH THAT STREETSCAPE. IT DOES LOOK VERY SIMILAR TO A LOT OF THE HOMES ON THAT PARTICULAR STREET. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, HE WANTS CERTAIN PRODUCTS IN HIS HOME, SO WE ASK THAT YOU GUYS CONSIDER THAT FOR HIM. THANK YOU. UH, WE DO HAVE CITIZEN TO BE HEARD. WE'LL, IF YOU'LL, UH, TAKE A SEAT, THEN WE'LL HAVE YOU BACK UP HERE. UM, WE DO NOT. SORRY, WE MIGHT HAVE WRITTEN IT DOWN WRONG, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED IN. YEP. I WANNA SAY SOME. I THINK YOU'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD, COMPELLED A REALLY GOOD CASE FOR THE SPANISH WINDOW, FENESTRATION STYLE, THE ARCH WINDOW, AND AS WELL AS THE ROOF. UM, I THINK STAFF'S COMMENT WAS NOT SO MUCH ON THE COLOR, JUST ON THE, ON THE, UM, SPECIFICATION OF THE ROOF. YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE OKAY WITH THAT, THAT SPECIFICATIONS FOLLOW OR YEAH. YES, I THINK WE MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS. I, I HAD MY ROOFER MAKE A SAMPLE TO BRING JUST SO THAT THEY COULD SEE IT TONIGHT. 'CAUSE I DIDN'T, AS LONG AS THEY, UH, AGREE WITH IT, THAT'S FINE. OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD. UM, SO YOU DID, AND I, AND I, AND THE REASON ALSO IS BECAUSE, WELL, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S A FAIRLY NEW HISTORIC, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT NOT, NOT LONG AGO HAVE WE GONE AND SEEN SOME, UH, HOUSES THERE, UM, OTHER SITE VISITS. AND THERE ARE THOSE NEW TOWN HOMES THAT, WHICH I THINK THE ONES THAT YOU REFER TO, WHICH YOU PROBABLY CAN'T SEE ON THE MAP, BUT WE, WE ALL KNOW THAT THEY'RE THERE AND THEY'RE VERY SPANISH COLONIAL AND THEY ARE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE REASON WHY I WOULD ALSO ACCEPT THAT TYPE OF, UH, ARCH WINDOW. NOW ON THE WINDOWS, UM, LIKE YOU SAID, YOU'VE SAT HERE THROUGH THE NIGHT, SO ALUMINUM CLAD IS WHAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND FOR NEW BUILDS, NOT EX EXACTLY. YOU'RE NOT A REBUILDING, YOU'RE NOT REFURBISHING ANY WINDOWS, EXISTING WINDOWS, WHEREAS WE ALUMINUM CLAD WOULD WINDOWS WOULD BE SOMETHING ACCEPT. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD NOT WOOD WINDOWS NOT FULLY WOOD, EVEN THOSE STAFF WANTED TO RECOMMEND THAT. BUT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO ALUMINUM CLOUD, WOOD WINDOWS? UM, I, I HAVE A BROCHURE OF AN ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW. UM, YOU GUYS HAVE A PICTURE OF WHAT I HAVE. UM, WE CAN PROBABLY PROJECT THIS UP. THAT'S, UH, I'M NOT VERY GOOD WITH TECHNOLOGY. I'M, AND THE QUESTION WAS, 'CAUSE YOUR VINYL WINDOWS SHOW THEY'RE [03:00:01] WHITE AND WE DON'T, UM, THE GUIDELINES KIND OF WAS AWAY FROM THE MEN, WHITE MANUFACTURING. AND THOSE WINDOWS EXAMPLES THAT YOU SHOWED OF ARCH WINDOWS ARE NOT WHITE IS WE, UH, WE HAD TAN SPECIFIED ORIGINALLY. UM, SO THIS IS AN ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW. THIS IS, UM, THIS PARTICULAR WINDOW, UM, PROBABLY HAS THE BEST WARRANTY, UH, ON IT. UM, THE PROBLEM IS THE INSTALL, BECAUSE THE FLANGE, HOW THE FRAME WINDOW GOES IN, IT'S COMPLETELY SQUARE AROUND AND YOU INSET IT IN THE FRAME. MODERN WINDOWS HAVE A FLANGE, SO THEY'RE SELF FLASHING SO THEY DON'T LEAK WATER AND GET ROT LIKE THE WINDOWS WE'VE SEEN THROUGHOUT TONIGHT. UM, WHEN YOU HAVE THAT FLANGE TO SECURE TO THE FRAME, YOU CAN PROPERLY SEAL THEM FOR THE ENERGY CODE. YOU CAN PROPERLY WINDOW TAPE THEM AND FLASH THEM WITHOUT CAUSING PROBLEMS THAT CAUSE FUTURE LEAKS. UM, I'VE, I'VE DONE THESE KIND OF WINDOWS IN MY, IN MY PAST. UM, I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF THEM. UM, I THINK IT, THEY LEND THEMSELVES TO PROBABLY NOT DURING MY APPLICABLE WARRANTY PERIOD, BUT DURING THE CUSTOMER'S OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY THAT THEY WILL CAUSE SOME KIND OF PROBLEM THAT LEADS, UH, MR. BROWN TO COME BACK HERE AT SOME POINT IN HIS LIFE. HE'S A YOUNG MAN TO COME BACK HERE AND ASK TO PULL THE WINDOWS OUT TO FIX 'EM. AND, UM, I, I JUST, I'M NOT A FAN. I, I THINK THEY'RE A PROBLEM LONG TERM FOR ANY HOMEOWNER TO PUT THOSE KIND OF WINDOWS IN AND THEY JUST DON'T MAKE 'EM WITH A, WITH A SELF, UH, UH, UH, WITH A SELF FLASHING WINDOW INSTALL. SO THAT'S THE REASON WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST A BETTER WAY TO BUILD. THINGS HAVE CHANGED, UH, IN MY OWN 25 YEARS OF BUILDING. A LOT OF THINGS HAVE CHANGED. THE CODES KEEP CHANGING, THE INSTALL METHODS KEEP CHANGING, THE PRODUCTS KEEP CHANGING. AND, YOU KNOW, EVERY NOW AND THEN I HEAR A COMMERCIAL ON TV THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE BUILD THEM LIKE WE USED TO. AND I THINK TO MYSELF ALWAYS THAT, GOD, I'M GLAD I DON'T BUILD THEM LIKE I USED TO. I, I DON'T HAVE WINDOW LEAKS ANYMORE. AND EARLY ON IN MY HOME BUILDING CAREER, WE FIX WINDOW LEAKS IN PEOPLE'S HOMES ALL THE TIME TODAY. I NEVER SEE IT, IT DOESN'T COME ACROSS THE WARRANTY REPORTS THAT I GET EVERY WEEK. IT'S JUST THINGS ARE BETTER TODAY. THE LOOK FROM THE STREET, I DON'T THINK ANY, UM, I DON'T WANT TO SAY LAYMAN, BUT ANY PERSON THAT THAT JUST DRIVES UP AND DOWN THE STREET CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING BETWEEN LOOKING AT ALUMINUM WINDOW, AN ALUMINUM CLAD, UH, OVER WOOD, A WOOD WINDOW OR VINYL WINDOW, THE, THE LOOK FROM THE STREET IS STILL VERY AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. SO, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD JUST ASK THAT YOU GUYS CONSIDER THAT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S A NEW BUILD. IT'S NOT A, UH, HISTORICAL REPLACEMENT. SO WE'VE, WE'VE DONE, UH, UH, OUR HOMEWORK ON THOSE VINYL WINDOWS AND WE'VE DONE SOME CASE STUDIES. WE'VE ALLOWED, UM, INSTANCES AND AND INSTANCE WHERE WE ACTUALLY DID THAT AND, AND THEN WHEN OUT AND CHECKED ON THE PROPERTY. AND, AND I'M SURE THAT STAFF AND EVERYBODY CAN TALK TO THAT, BUT THERE'S, THAT HAS BEEN VETTED. I MEAN, WE HAVE, WE HAVE THESE STANDARDS AND WE'VE BEEN USING THESE STANDARDS FOR A REASON. THERE'S, AND WE'VE INCREASED THOSE STANDARDS TO INCLUDE THE ALUMINUM CLOUD WOOD WINDOWS FOR, FOR THAT REASON. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF ARCHITECTS ON THIS BOARD AND WE UNDERSTAND, I I, I, TRUST ME, WE UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. UM, BUT THERE'S ALSO, UH, THERE THIS PROCESS. AND THE REASON WHY WE DON'T GIVE ON THIS PROCESS VERY OFTEN OR AT ALL IS BECAUSE WE HAVE SET THESE STANDARDS UNDER A LOT OF SCRUTINY AND CONSISTENCY IS VERY IMPORTANT. SURE. I I UNDERSTAND THAT. YOU KNOW, I'VE, UH, I I, I'VE SAT IN YOUR CHAIR BEFORE, UH, I RESPECT THAT. I JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE REALITY OF WHAT WE DO, UM, EVERY DAY, UH, AND WHAT WE CAN DRAW ON PAPER AND WHAT WE CAN PROVE UP IN, IN PERFORMANCE AND A S D M STANDARDS AND, AND WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS IN THE FIELD IS QUITE DIFFERENT. UM, IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW GOOD THE HOME BUILDER IS OR HOW GOOD THE ARCHITECT IS OR HOW GOOD THE ENGINEER IS, THERE'S STILL A HUMAN ELEMENT INVOLVED. UM, THESE TYPES OF, THAT TYPE OF WINDOW THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY UP THERE LENDS ITSELF TO FUTURE PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE. JUST, LET'S JUST, UM, MOVE ON FOR A SEC. 'CAUSE MAYBE THE ARCH WINDOW IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WON'T EVEN BE ABLE TO FIND ON A VINYL VERSION. MAYBE IT WILL HAVE TO BE AN ALUMINUM VERSION. SO, UM, I THINK STAFF HAS HAD ALSO AN ISSUE WITH THE FENESTRATION ON THE OTHER ELEVATIONS, NOT ONLY ON THE FRONT ARCH WINDOWS. YES. AND STAFF WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT. UM, THE STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD STUDY FENESTRATION PATTERNS OF EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE BLOCK WAS NOT DUE TO THE SHAPE OF THE ARCHED WINDOW, BUT THE PROPORTION, UM, THE GUIDELINES [03:05:01] STIPULATE THAT, UM, WINDOWS ARE CONSIDERED SIMILAR TO EXISTING IN THE, IN THE DISTRICT IF THEY'RE NO LONGER, LARGER THAN 25% IN SIZE AND VARY NO MORE THAN 10% IN HEIGHT TO WIDTH RATIO FROM ADJACENT HISTORIC FACADES. ADDITIONALLY, UM, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE APPLICANT STUDY THE FENESTRATION PATTERNS OF EXISTING STRUCTURES AND APPLY THOSE TO THE EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS, UM, OF THE PROPOSED FENESTRATION PATTERN. SO I THINK WE DO HAVE A WHOLE FENESTRATION BIGGER DISCUSSION. OKAY. AND THAT ARCH WINDOW THAT YOU SHOWED ME ON THAT NEW TOWN HOME, THAT'S MORE LIKE WHAT STAFF IS SAYING AND I GUESS YOUR DRAWINGS AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOU WANT, THAT'S WHERE YOU WANT, YEAH, MAYBE YOUR DRAWINGS A LITTLE BIT OFF, BUT THAT'S ON THE ARCH WINDOW. UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UM, LEFT ELEVATION, THERE'S A LOT OF THOSE SMALL SQUARE WINDOWS THAT'S NOT SOMETHING COMMONLY WE SEE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. SO MAYBE THERE'S A WAY THAT IS THIS FINAL OR CONCEPTUAL, THIS IS CONCEPTUAL. I WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH, UM, KEEPING THE STIPULATIONS, JUST YOU KNOWING WE'VE ALREADY HAD THIS DISCUSSION, MEANING WE'RE NOT TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE ARCH WINDOW, BUT JUST IN GENERAL, UM, ALL OF THE FENESTRATIONS ON THE OTHER ELEVATIONS MAY WANNA BE, UH, TALKED ABOUT AGAIN. AND I, AND I WOULD SUGGEST WORKING WITH STAFF ON THOSE ELEVATIONS BEFORE YOU COME BACK, UNLESS YOU WANT TO COME BACK FOR WHAT WE CONSIDER D R C, WHICH IS WHERE YOU SIT DOWN WITH COMMISSIONERS AND REVIEW IT. I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT. THAT'S MR. BROWN. I'M, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST HERE REPRESENTING, YOU KNOW, HIS WISHES. SO, SO I WOULD, I WOULD JUST SAY, UM, I, I THINK THAT THAT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. AND I THINK THAT IF YOU CAN WORK WITH STAFF OR IF YOU, I MEAN, WORK WITH STAFF UN UNLESS YOU CAN'T COME TO A RESOLUTION ON WINDOW SIZES, WINDOW LOCATIONS, UM, AND THEN WE CAN TRY TO MAKE SOME HEADWAY WITH STAFF AND THEN IT, HOPEFULLY YOU CAN COME BACK HERE AND HERE AND GET AN APPROVE, A FINAL APPROVAL. SO, UM, THE, THE SIDE OF THE HOME IS NOT VISIBLE FROM, IT'S A PRETTY TIGHT LOT. IF YOU SCROLL BACK, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE SITE PLAN EVEN EVEN IN THOSE SCENARIOS FOR PRIVACY. AND, AND YOU STILL HAVE TO PUT IN, UH, LARGER WINDOWS ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HOME. I MEAN, IS THERE SOME, UM, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR THOSE KINDS OF THINGS? UH, MAYBE YOU CAN SHOW US AN SITE PLAN, UM, HOW IT IS RELATED TO THAT HOME, BECAUSE THE OTHER HOME I SEE HAS ALSO SOME DECORATIVE WINDOWS. I, I, I WOULD THINK THAT IF, IF, IF, UH, YOU ACCEPTED A MOTION THAT, UM, SENT YOU BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD, RIGHT? NOT, NOT THE HOUSE AS A WHOLE, BUT THE, THE ITEMS THAT ARE STIPULATED BY STAFF, THAT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND, AND YOU HAVE TO COME BACK ANYWAY. RIGHT. THAT MAKE THE ADJUSTMENTS, WORKING WITH STAFF, KEEPING, KEEPING WHAT IT IS THAT YOU WANNA ARGUE FOR SURE. AND THEN, AND THEN THE DISCRETION BECOMES A, A CONVERSATION AND A DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT, IT SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T, WHICH KIND OF GIVES YOU AN OPPORTUNITY ALSO TO HAVE A PLAN A AND A PLAN B. RIGHT? RIGHT. THAT, THAT, IF YOU WANT, YOU SEE, I'M GONNA KEEP THOSE SQUARE WINDOWS. THAT'S WHAT I'M GONNA ARGUE FOR. BUT IN THE BACK OF YOUR PLAN, YOU ALSO KNOW THAT YOU HAVE ANOTHER SOLUTION. UH, I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD GO BACK FROM CONCEPTUAL GIVING EVERYTHING UP, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S A NEW HOUSE, BUT THERE, THERE, THEY'RE SPOT ON. I THINK OF THE PROPORTIONS THAT, ESPECIALLY THE ARCH WINDOW, THERE ARE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE WORKED OUT THROUGH YOUR CONCEPTUAL, AND, AND THEN WHEN YOU COME BACK, YOU STILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET TOGETHER WITH, WITH A COMMITTEE HERE. AND WE, WE TRIED THAT. WE, WE TRIED LAST WEEK. WE WERE ONE OF THOSE FOLKS THAT, UH, DIDN'T GET OUR SHOT AT THAT LAST WEEK. SO WE, IT HAPPENS ONCE A YEAR. WAS THAT A MOTION COMMISSIONER? YEAH. I, I'M, AND I, I, I APOLOGIZE FOR, FOR, UH, YOU GUYS NOT BEING HEARD AND, AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS GET THAT. BUT I WOULD JUST, UH, CAUTION AGAINST, UH, NOT HAVING A, A CONVERSATION WITH STAFF BEFORE COMING BACK, MAKING SURE YOU WORK WITH ON THAT FENESTRATION. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. 'CAUSE I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, COMING IN HERE WITH A, A REALLY GOOD SOLUTION WITH STAFF IS ALWAYS VERY VALUABLE FOR US. UM, SO I WOULD MOVE FOR, UH, CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS A SECOND. SO CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION? SO AS TIMES CHANGE, FOR THOSE OF YOU GUYS THAT ARE ARCHITECTS, AND ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE INVOLVED IN RESIDENTIAL HOME CONSTRUCTION, WOULD VINYL WINDOWS BE SOMETHING YOU GUYS WOULD EVER CONSIDER LOOKING AT? OR AM I WASTING MY TIME? IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE MAJORITY DOESN'T, BUT THERE ARE SOME THAT DO. SO YOU'RE TICKING YOUR CHANCES. YEAH. ALL RIGHTY. FAIR ENOUGH. IF A MOTION A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. MOTION STAFF. DOES STAFF HAVE A COMMENT ON THAT? SURE. UM, SO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES DON'T ACTUALLY SAY WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION HAVE TO BE BE WOOD OR HAVE TO BE ALUMINUM, OR HAVE TO BE ANY SPECIFIC MATERIAL. WHAT THEY SAY IS THAT THE MATERIAL NEEDS TO BE COMPATIBLE IN TERMS OF APPEARANCE WITH THOSE FOUND [03:10:01] HISTORICALLY. UM, WE HAVE FOUND, UM, JUST OVER CASE HISTORY WITH ALL THE NEW CONSTRUCTION CASES THAT WE'VE REVIEWED, THAT WHAT IS RECOMMENDED IN YOUR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THE MOST CONSISTENT WITH, WITH THE GUIDELINES. THEY TEND TO LOOK THE MOST LIKE THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY. UM, SO IT'S NOT THAT VINYL IS PROHIBITED, IT'S JUST NOBODY HAS COME TO US YET WITH A VINYL WINDOW. THAT SEEMS TO BE A GOOD MATCH. OKAY. UH, WE'LL LOOK FOR THAT AND THAT, YEAH. AND THAT MEETS THE, THE DIMENSIONAL GUIDELINES, THE SETBACK GUIDELINES BECAUSE OF THAT, UH, UH, FLANGE THAT, THAT REALLY HINDERS YOUR ABILITY TO HAVE THAT DEPTH. THEY JUST DON'T MAKE THE SETBACKS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. RIGHT. YEAH. WE'LL CHECK, WE'LL CHECK INTO THAT. MY GUYS WILL KNOW. SO APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT ON THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK THE MOTION WAS WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS, WHICH SAID GAL LOOM FINISH. WE'LL LET, WE'LL LET YOU WORK WITH STAFF ON THAT FOR, UM, UNTIL FINAL APPROVAL. AND THEN WE WILL, I GUESS, HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. [B-21 20-2200 Address/Description: 524 DEVINE ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-063 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Randy Grothues Request: Curb cut installation, rear deck addition, side addition, fenestration modifications City Council Dist.: 1] AGENDA ITEM B 21, H C R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 0 6 3 5 24 DIVINE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, INSTALL A CURB CUT IN NEW DRIVEWAY. TWO, CONSTRUCT A REAR ADDITION. THREE, INSTALL A SMALL SIDE ADDITION TOWARD THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. FOUR, REMOVE ONE OF TWO EXISTING FRONT DOORS AND ENCLOSE WITH SIDING. FIVE. PERFORM FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS ON THE REAR FACADE OF THE STRUCTURE TO ACCOMMODATE EGRESS RECOMMENDATIONS. ITEM ONE, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CURB CUT AND NEW DRIVEWAY INSTALLATION BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH B STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT EXPLORE REAR PARKING OPTIONS AVAILABLE ON SADIE. ITEM TWO, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A REAR STORAGE EDITION AND COVERED DECK BASED ON FINDINGS C THROUGH D. ITEM THREE, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIDE EDITION BASED ON FINDING E WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. ONE THAT THE FIBER CEMENT SIDING FEATURE A FULLY SMOOTH FINISH AND A MAXIMUM REVEAL OF SIX INCHES FO GRAIN TEXTURE IS NOT APPROPRIATE. TWO, THAT THE SALVAGED AND RELOCATED WINDOW FEATURE TRADITIONAL WINDOW, WOOD, TRIMS, SILL, AND INSET DETAILING AS FEATURED ON THE EXISTING PRIMARY HISTORIC STRUCTURE. ITEM FOUR, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ENCLOSING ONE OF TWO DOORS BASED ON FINDING F. ITEM FIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF MODIFYING THE REAR DOOR AND EXISTING KITCHEN WINDOW BASED ON FINDING G WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT SALVAGES THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND DOORS AND RETAINS THEM ON SITE FOR REPAIRS OR AN ALTERNATE FUTURE USE. THE APPLICANT, UM, IS IN AGREEANCE WITH ALL OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS EXCEPT FOR THE, UM, LACK OF APPROVAL FOR THE CURB CUT, NEW DRIVEWAY INSTALLATION AND WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS ON THAT ITEM. MY NAME'S RANDY, GROWTH HUGHES. AND, UH, WE ARE, UH, BUYING THE HOME FOR OURSELVES. GONNA BE OUR PRIMARY RESIDENCE WON'T BE A RENTAL OR A FLIP. AND, UM, UH, THE ONLY, THE ONLY ITEM WE HAVE A, WE WE'D LIKE TO PRESENT A HOPEFULLY COMPELLING ARGUMENT FOR IS THAT CURB CUT. UM, SO WHEN WE WERE, I WANNA GIVE YOU A LITTLE CONTEXT OF WHY WE CAME TO THAT DECISION WITH OUR ARCHITECT. OUR FIRST CONSIDERATION WAS TO USE THE, UH, THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY, BUT THE WIDTH IS ONLY EIGHT FEET WIDE, SO IT WON'T FIT A CAR. SO, UM, WE STARTED TALKING TO OUR ARCHITECT. HE SUGGESTED THE OTHER SIDE, WHICH HAS 12 FEET OF SIDE YARD THAT HAS NO OTHER REAL GOOD USE. IT'S JUST LAND ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. UM, AND LOOKING AT THE, UM, THE BACKYARD, WE HAVE A LARGE PECAN TREE. WE HAVE AN EXISTING STRUCTURE. UM, SO IT WOULD, IT WOULD KIND OF CONSTRICT THE PLACEMENT OF THE, OF THE DRIVEWAY. PLUS WE'D HAVE A LONG WALK TO OUR HOME. WE'RE CARRYING GROCERIES OR, OR JUST TRYING TO GET TO GET INSIDE ON A RAINY EVENING. UM, AND THEN THE FINAL THING IS, UH, THE DRIVEWAY AND BACK IS KIND OF INCONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE STREET. WHEN YOU LOOK UP AND DOWN THE STREET, UH, MOST OF THE HOUSES HAVE A FRONT DRIVEWAY ON THE SIDE. AND SINCE THE ONE THAT WAS THERE THAT ALREADY HAD THE CURB CUT, UH, IS NON-FUNCTIONAL, IT WON'T, IT WON'T SERVE THAT PURPOSE. IT JUST MADE SENSE TO US TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE WHERE WE DO HAVE ENOUGH ROOM. [03:15:01] UM, WE THINK IT'S THE BEST USE IN FACT THAT 12 FEET ON THE SIDE. UM, SO YEAH, THAT'S ABOUT IT. SPEAK TO YOUR, UH, ADJACENT NEIGHBOR TO THE, I GUESS IT WOULD, WELL, WHOEVER WOULD BE NEXT TO THAT PROPOSED DRIVE. IS THEIR DRIVE ON THAT SIDE OR IS IT ON THEIR OTHER PROPERTY? IT'S ON THE OTHER, THE OTHER, IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE. OKAY. SO THAT, THAT WOULD BE KIND OF MY CONCERN IS IF, IF THEY WERE JOINED TOGETHER, THEN YOU GET, BEGIN TO GET THIS SORT OF EXPANSE OF TWO DRIVEWAYS, KIND OF A LOT OF HARDSCAPE AND SORT OF A DISRUPTION TO THE PATTERN. BUT IF IT'S, IF THEY'RE KIND OF ON THE SAME SIDE, THEN I COULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. AND, UM, AND I THINK I COULD BE CONVINCED OF THAT. I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THINK. I HAVE A QUESTION. THE NEW DRIVEWAY, HOW WIDE WOULD IT BE? UH, I GUESS IT, IT WOULD, WE'D BE WILLING TO WORK WITH, UH, H D R C RECOMMENDATIONS. I THINK IT WOULD BE THE STANDARD WIDTH IS WHAT, 10 FEET? SO, YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, 'CAUSE YOUR DRAWING WAS KIND OF SAYING, UM, I MEAN I KNOW IT'S 12 TO LIKE SOME STEPPING STONES, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR THAT WE CAN'T ACCEPT MORE THAN 10 ANYWAY. SO, UM, AND THEN JUST TO STAFF, HOW WOULD THAT WORK? HE WOULD HAVE TO GO GET APPROVED FROM THE CITY AS WELL TO GET THAT CURB CUT OR REMOVED OR, YEAH, THERE'S A PERMIT REQUIRED FROM RIGHT AWAY. AND WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH THE OTHER CURB CUT? WILL YOU LIKE CLOSE IT? LIKE WE WOULD BE WILLING TO REPAIR IT AND, AND RESTORE THE CURB ALONG THAT SIDE. UM, AND THE YARD, I UNDERSTAND THE GUIDELINES, UM, AND THAT'S WHAT WE ALWAYS LEAN TOWARDS IS, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE DRIVEWAY WAS. THAT'S WHAT WE RECOMMEND. I COULD KIND OF MAYBE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL. YEAH. OKAY. 'CAUSE A LOT OF THE STREETS HAVE BEEN REDONE AND THEY MAY HAVE DONE SOMETHING. UM, I GUESS THIS PICTURE WOULD PROBABLY BE WHAT THIS ONE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SCREEN IS THAT THAT COULD PROBABLY WORK IN OUR FAVOR. UM, IF, IF MAYBE A STIPULATION COULD BE MADE THAT YOU'RE GONNA REBUILD IT, THE DRIVE SO THAT THAT EXISTING DRIVEWAY JUST BECOMES NON-EXISTENT. YEAH, WE COULD DO THAT SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS. RIGHT. AND IF YOU SELL THE HOUSE ONE DAY, SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO TWO DRIVEWAYS, RIGHT? NO. YEAH. IT COULD BE SOME, WE COULD, WE'D BE WILLING TO REPAIR THAT AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE, UH, NOW WOULD INCLUDE REMOVAL OF THAT APRON UP TO THE SIDEWALK. SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, UNLESS THERE'S SOME MORE DIALOGUE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 2, 3, 4, AND FIVE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE, UH, EXISTING DRIVEWAY, UH, CURB AND APRON BE REMOVED AND REPAIRED AND THAT THE, UH, UH, UH, APPLICANT RETURNED TO STAFF TO, UH, REVIEW, UH, A REPLACEMENT LANDSCAPE IN THE AREA OF THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY. SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. AS A REMINDER, AGENDA ITEMS B 22 AND B 24 HAVE BEEN APPROVED WITH CONSENT FROM THE APPLICANT. MOVING TO CASE B 23 [B-23 20-2102 Address/Description: 901 MASON ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-070 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Patrick Attwater /One80 Solar Request: Solar car canopy City Council Dist.: 2] AT, UH, OR CASE NUMBER 20 20 0 70 AT 9 0 1 MASON, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL EIGHT VEHICULAR METAL CARPORT WITH, UH, SOLAR COLLECTORS. STAFF RECOMMENDS A STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A CARPORT WITH SOLAR COLLECTORS BASED ON FINDINGS B THROUGH E WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE CARPORT FEATURES TRADITIONAL WOOD FRAMING WITH CORNER COLUMNS. INSTEAD THE PROPOSED CANTILEVERED METAL BEAM SYSTEM, UPDATED DRAWINGS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME'S PATRICK ATWATER AND I'M WITH 180 SOLAR. WE'RE THE ONES WORKING ON THIS PROJECT WITH THE TEAM OVER AT 9 0 1 MASON. UM, THEY APPROACHED US WANTING TO LOOK AT ADDING SOLAR, UH, TO THEIR OFFICE BUILDING HERE. AND, UH, WE DIDN'T FIND THE ROOF TO BE, UH, PROBABLY THE BEST PLACE TO PUT IT, UH, BOTH HISTORICALLY AND JUST FUNCTIONALLY WE WEREN'T ABLE TO FIT MANY UP THERE. SO THAT'S WHERE WE WENT TO LOOK AT THE, UH, THE PARKING LOT AND SUGGESTED TO THEM THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD FIT. AND THEY WERE EXCITED ABOUT IT, OFFERING COVERED PARKING FOR THEIR TENANTS AND ABLE TO FIT, UH, MORE POWER AND IT BE MORE, UH, OR LESS, I SHOULD SAY, VISIBLE, UH, HISTORICALLY. SO THAT'S WHERE WE CAME UP WITH THIS DESIGN. THIS IS A DESIGN THAT WE'VE USED. IN OTHER CASES, UH, IT WORKS REALLY WELL. IT'S A GALVANIZED METAL, [03:20:01] UH, STRUCTURE TO MATCH THE LOOK OF THE, UH, OF THE ROOF, THE METAL ROOF. IT'S A GALVANIZED ROOF. UM, AND WE WANTED TO MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF COLUMNS JUST SO THAT THERE WEREN'T ISSUES WITH TENANTS PULLING IN AND OUT AND TO MINIMIZE HOW MANY COLUMNS WE ACTUALLY NEEDED TO PUT IN THE GROUND ITSELF. UH, IT'S A PRETTY TIGHT PARKING AREA BACK THERE, SO THEY HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF COLUMNS. SO THEY REQUESTED THAT WE TRY TO MINIMIZE THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. THE STRUCTURES DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY TO SUPPORT THE WEIGHT OF THE, OF THE MODULES AND THE MODULES THEMSELVES ARE THE, THE ROOF. THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT IF THE, IF THERE IS NO OTHER ROOF UNDERNEATH, BUT THE PURLINS THEMSELVES SUPPORT THE MODULES, THEN IT'S CONSIDERED A SOLAR SUPPORT STRUCTURE AND QUALIFIES FOR TAX INCENTIVES. IF WE ACTUALLY DID PUT A ROOF ON TOP, THEN UH, IT WOULDN'T HAVE THAT QUALIFICATION. SO THOSE WERE THE KIND OF THE IDEAS BEHIND THE DESIGN. UM, AFTER TALKING TO STAFF, WE COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, UH, THE CONCERNS OF THE LOOK, ESPECIALLY FROM THIS, THIS VIEW HERE. UM, OUR FIRST THOUGHT WAS THAT I THINK IT'D BE A PRETTY, UH, A PRETTY GOOD SPOT TO PUT SOME VEGETATIVE SCREENING THERE. UM, AND THAT WOULD NOT ONLY BLOCK THE LOOK OF THE CANOPY FROM THE SIDE, BUT ALSO THE PARKING IN GENERAL. SO YOU WOULDN'T SEE THAT COMMERCIAL PARKING. UM, BEYOND THAT WE COULD ALSO CONSIDER, UM, PAINTING OR SOME OTHER WAYS OF GOING ABOUT IT. BUT THOSE ARE KIND OF THE DESIGN PARAMETERS THAT WE WERE WORKING WITHIN TO, TO, TO COME UP WITH THIS INITIAL DESIGN. SO YOU ANTICIPATE WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY AS FAR AS I THINK A LANDSCAPE, UH, SOLUTION MAY BE, UH, APPROPRIATE HERE. UH, EVEN IF IT'S LIKE SOME KIND OF VERTICAL TRELLO, SOMETHING THAT'S, UH, EITHER ASSOCIATED WITH THE FENCING OR WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, SUPPORT STRUCTURE ITSELF. TO BEGIN TO KINDA SCREEN THAT A BIT. I, I'M, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. I'M GLAD YOU GUYS DIDN'T TRY, TRY TO PUT IT ON THE HOUSE. I, I THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE THING THAT, UH, AND KIND OF THEORETICALLY REVERSIBLE. IT COULD GO AWAY SOMEDAY. AND IF WE CAN JUST GET IT SCREENED PROPERLY, I'D, I'D BE IN FULLY FULL SUPPORT OF THIS. AND I, AND I THINK IT'S GONNA PRODUCE AROUND 80% OF THE POWER FOR THE BUILDING, WHICH IS PRETTY EXCITING TOO. SO THAT, THAT PUT IT AS ONE OF THE MOST SUSTAINABLE OFFICE BUILDINGS IN THE CITY. SO IT'S PRETTY COOL. I WOULD AGREE WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER THAT I THINK WITH A, SOME SORT OF SCREEN WALL HERE, LANDSCAPING, UH, WHAT HAVE YOU, IT MIGHT BE, UH, ACCEPTABLE. RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST, UM, SO COMMERCIAL LOOKING IN A, UM, HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH A LOT OF RESIDENCES AROUND. YEAH. AND I THINK THAT THE TENANT WAS ACTUALLY, OR THE OWNER WAS VERY EXCITED ACTUALLY ABOUT THE IDEA OF SCREENING IT ANYWAYS AND JUST KIND OF CONTINUING THE LOOK OF THE, OF THE FENCING. SO HAVING THAT, UH, BLACK WROUGHT IRON, MAKING IT DECORATIVE AND NICE, AND THEN HAVING THE VEGETATION GROW ON THAT TO BLOCK AND SCREEN THE VIEW OF IT. I'LL MOVE TO A PROOF WITH A STIPULATION THAT, UM, SOME KIND OF A LANDSCAPE PLAN IS PROVIDED BEFORE THE STAFF, BEFORE CONSTRUCTION. SO KIND OF LIKE THEY GO UP AT THE SAME TIME. IF THAT'S SOMETHING, I'M NOT SURE IF WE'RE COMPLETE AGREEMENT OF HOW THAT LANDSCAPING SHOULD BE. 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU CAN ADD ANOTHER EIGHT FEET TO YOUR FENCE. HMM. YEAH. SO, I MEAN, AND YOU'RE NOT THE ONE THAT'S GONNA BE DOING THAT ANYWAY. UM, I'M JUST CHECKING IF THERE WERE SOME STIPULATIONS. I I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT THE MATERIALITY OF THAT FENCE IS IMPORTANT. LIKE WHAT THAT FENCE IS MADE OF, WHAT THAT VEGETATION SCREEN IS MADE OF THAT NEEDS TO, YOU KNOW, I THINK I, I AGREE. I THINK THAT THE, UH, DRAWINGS FOR THAT NEED TO BE INTO STAFF FOR APPROVAL BEFORE FINAL. OKAY. YEAH. MY COMMENT ABOUT THE, UH, LANDSCAPING SCREEN, I SEE THAT MORE AS BEING MUCH CLOSER TO THE, UH, CANOPY, NOT OUT AT THE STREET LINE. OKAY. NOT JUST RAISING THE DEFENSE ITSELF. SO, UM, THE MOTION SECOND. HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. AND ITEM B 24 WAS HANDLED PREVIOUSLY. SO THAT IS IT. MOTION TO [Approval of HDRC Meeting Minutes for February 5, 2020] APPROVE MINUTES FROM THANK YOU. FEBRUARY 5TH. SECOND. SECOND, SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. 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.