* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:05] HEY JEFF, WE'RE READY FOR, UH, ALL THE ORDER. THIS IS, UH, CHAIRMAN FETZER. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3RD, 2020. AND FOR ROLL CALL PLEASE. [Roll Call] HERNANDEZ. HERE, FISH. HERE. GIBBS. HERE. VELAZQUEZ VELAZQUEZ. PRESENT AREOLA. HERE. CARPENTER. HERE. RUDE. HERE, COLEMAN? HERE. UM, THATOR HERE. HERE. THANK YOU. BEFORE WE START, UM, WE HAVE A QUICK TRANSLATE OR ANNOUNCEMENT FROM TRANSLATION SERVICES. LOOK AT THE [Chairman’s Statement] CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT, PLEASE. YES. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIR IS SCOTT CARPENTER. IT IS A 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 CITY RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY, AND FOR DEMOLITIONS. AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION WILL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN 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. THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH THIS MEETING THROUGH LIVE STREAM. THEY CAN ALSO LISTEN TO THE MEETING THROUGH AUDIO ON WAY BY CALLING 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3. THE MEETING IS BEING RECORDED IN SPANISH. FOR THOSE APPLICANTS OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT REQUIRE TRANSLATION SERVICES, THE INTERPRETER WILL TRANSLATE OVER. THE PHONE IS NECESSARY. APPLICANTS WILL NEED TO SUMMARIZE THEIR STATEMENTS AND BE AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION HAVE A MAXIMUM OF TWO MINUTES FOR ALL THEIR COMMENTS. APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF ANY TYPE OF PERMIT. PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ALL WORK. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR WORK APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE 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, I'LL ASK O H P STAFF TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING. YES, THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. UM, SO WE'LL BEGIN SHORTLY BY DISPLAYING A LIST OF CASES TO BE HEARD TODAY. JUST AS USUAL, WE HAVE CASES THAT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. UM, THOSE ARE THE CASES WHERE STAFF HAS EITHER RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OR BE OFFERED AS AGREED TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS. UM, WHEN WE GET TO THE LIST, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE WHICH ITEMS HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS. UM, FOR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE WILL FIRST REVIEW ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS PROVIDED FOR THOSE ITEMS AT ONCE BEFORE TAKING ACTION. UM, WRITTEN COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED OUTSIDE OF THE ONLINE FORM OR, UM, SUBMITTED AFTER THE DEADLINE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. AND WE WILL DRIVE FOLDER REVIEW AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE. UM, REMINDER COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE KEEP YOURSELF MUTED UNLESS YOU'RE SPEAKING. UM, THIS HELPS PROTECT THE AUDIO QUALITY FOR THE MEETING. UM, FOR EACH CASE, WE'LL START, AS WE ALWAYS DO, BY READING THE REQUEST LANGUAGE AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. UM, WE WILL HAVE THE APPLICANT FOR EACH CASE ON THE LINE TO LISTEN OR PROVIDE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. UM, REMEMBER THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK, PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF. STATE YOUR NAME BEFORE SPEAKING, UM, THAT WAY WE'RE NOT SPEAKING OVER ONE ANOTHER. UM, BEFORE WE DISPLAY [Public Comments] THE CASE LIST, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF GENERAL COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE PUBLIC. SO I'LL GET TO THOSE NOW. UM, THE FIRST COMES FROM NORMA CANTU AT 24 20 COLA. SHE SAYS, THE WORK YOU DO HAS AN IMPACT FOR THE FUTURE OF SAN ANTONIO AS WE PRESERVE OUR PAST AND HONOR THE WORK OF SO MANY OF US WHO HAVE BEEN INABLE IN SEEKING TO PRESERVE OUR CULTURAL HERITAGE, DO IT WITH, OF YOU TO THE FUTURE. THOSE SEVEN GENERATIONS IN THE FUTURE WILL. THANK YOU. UM, THIS NEXT COMMENT COMES, UM, FROM . SO, YOU KNOW, ON BEHALF OF, UM, SEVERAL NEIGHBORS OF THE DIGNITY HALL HISTORIC DISTRICT, UM, WE SUPPORT O H P STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ALL CASES IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND WE HOPE THAT COMMISSION MEMBERS APPRECIATE AND CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE [00:05:01] GUIDELINES IN EACH OF THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. TODAY'S CASES REVEAL ONCE AGAIN THE HIGH LEVEL OF WORK BEING PERFORMED IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT WITHOUT ADEQUATE O H P REVIEWS. AND IN SOME CASES WITHOUT D S D PERMITS, THIS UNAUTHORIZED AND ALMOST ALWAYS NON-CONFORMING WORK SHOULD NOT BE HAPPENING. BUT IT IS, FRANKLY, THE GUIDELINES ARE BASIC ENOUGH TO ALLOW GREAT LATITUDE IN THEIR INTERPRETATION FOR A VARIETY OF SOLUTIONS. IN MANY CASES, WHEN A PROPERTY OWNER SHOWS A COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR THEIR PROCESS, IT SHOWS A HIGH LEVEL OF DISRESPECT FOR BASIC ORDINANCES THAT ARE IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT PROPERTY OWNERS CAN COEXIST IN THE FAIR SETTING AND THAT OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS SOME LEVEL OF INTEGRITY. UH, WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY WHEN O H P COMMENCES THE U D C AMENDMENT PROCESS AND HOPE WE CAN ADDRESS ENFORCEMENT. UM, UNLESS THE CITY CAN ENFORCE ORDINANCES AND LAWS, THESE LOCKS ONLY CONTINUE TO KEEP HONEST PEOPLE HONEST. IT DOES NOTHING TO THOSE WHO ARE DETERMINED TO BYPASS THE PROCESS AND THE SOCIAL CONTRACT THAT WE'VE ALL AGREED TO WORK, UM, BY AS PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE CITY. UM, LAUREN, CAN YOU PLEASE PULL THE CASE LIST FOR US? US? UM, SO WE HAVE 17 CASES THAT [Consent Agenda] ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. UM, WE CAN SEE WE HAVE COMMENTS FOR SEVERAL OF THOSE. UM, I DO HAVE COMMENTS TO READ. UM, SO I'LL START DOING THAT NOW. ACTUALLY, I THINK NONE OF THEM ARE SUBMITTED TO THE FORM TO BE READ. SO ALL OF THEM ARE LETTERS IN YOUR PACKETS. UM, SO I DO HAVE ITEM ONE, THE PROPOSED NCE TO HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, I HAVE A SUMMARY OF THE SUPPORT LETTERS THAT I'D LIKE TO READ, AND THEN WE DO HAVE A CALL IN, UM, FOR THAT ITEM. UM, SO FOR THAT DISTRICT, WE RECEIVED NEARLY 20 LETTERS AND COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE RECONCEIVE ZO HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, THESE REMARKS ARE A SUMMARY OF EVERYTHING THAT WOULD TAKE SOME TIME TO READ THEM ALL, BUT WE DO THANK EVERYONE. FURTHER INPUT, UM, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS, INCLUDING STACY AND THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO, SHARED THEIR SUPPORT. NAI YA SANCHEZ ZO WROTE ON BEHALF OF THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENCE ASSOCI ASSOCIATION, THAT THEY WANT THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO TO RECOGNIZE THE HISTORIC ROLE THAT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS PLAYED IN THE CITY. AND THE DESIGNATION OF THE RECON DEZA AS A HISTORIC DISTRICT WILL HELP AFFIRM THIS. ANTONIO CASTANEDA WRITING ON BEHALF OF THE WEST SIDE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE NOTED THAT THE DESIGNATION WILL EXPRESS THE IMPORTANCE OF PRESERVING WORKING CLASS MEXICAN AMERICAN AND MEXICAN AESTHETICS, HISTORY AND CULTURE. SEVERAL OTHERS EMPHASIZE THE SIGNIFICANT BUT UNDERTOLD HISTORY OF THE WEST SIDE. RACHEL DEGA DELGADO, DR. RAUL MARTINEZ, DAVID RICARDO GONZALEZ, MARY CASTILLO, JA GILBERTO, UH, QUESADA DONNA GARRA ALL COMMENTED THAT THE DISTRICT WOULD SHOWCASE THE COMMUNITY'S RICH, CULTURAL, SOCIAL, AND HISTORIC LEGACY. UH, PATTY RALE AND MOMA ELLIOT KENTU, UH, BOTH POINTED OUT THE ESP ESPANZA PEACE OF JUSTICE CENTER. THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER HAS MADE INVALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO OBSERVING THE CULTURE AND HISTORIC MEMORY OF THE WEST SIDE. MANY, MANY OF THE COMMENTERS ALSO WROTE ABOUT THEIR FAMILIES AND SHARED HOW THE DESIGNATION OF PRESERVE AND CELEBRATE THIS PLACE WHERE THEY GREW UP, WHERE THEIR PARENTS AND RELATIVES STARTED AND GREW THRIVING LOCAL BUSINESSES AND WHERE TODAY THEIR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN ARE RAISING THEIR OWN FAMILIES. UM, JOSE SILLER, BEATRICE MORENO, UH, MICHELLE MILLO, UH, JAVIER SANCHEZ, ISABELLE AND ENRIQUE SANCHEZ. UH, RICHARD JOSEPH IAR AND, UM, EL AL ALL ROAD TO SUPPORT THE DESIGNATION WITH REMARKS ABOUT THE JEEP ROOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THANK YOU TO EVERYONE FOR SUBMITTING THOSE. UM, AND NOW I BELIEVE, UM, JESS HAS OUR CALL IN SPEAKER ON LINE. GO AHEAD. UNMUTE. JESS. JESS, ARE YOU THERE? I AM, BUT I, I WAS NOT CHARGED WITH CALLING. I THINK WE PERHAPS HAVE THEM ON THE LINE. ONE SECOND PLEASE. JESS, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL OLA? GIMME ONE MOMENT. [00:10:50] CAN YOU ON MUTE NUMBER? YEAH. YES. ARE YOU THERE MARGARET, PLEASE? I TO THE CALL RIGHT NOW. HOLD ON ONE MOMENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I HAVE GRACIELA ON THE LINE. THANK YOU. UM, GRACIE, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, TODAY'S A HISTORICAL MOMENT. THIS IS THE FIRST HISTORICAL DISTRICT OF THE WEST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO. SINCE 2001, THE PEACE AND JUSTICE CENTER HAS WORKED TO SAVE OUR BUILDINGS AND TO KEEP ALIVE OUR HISTORY, CULTURE, AND TRADITION, BOTH TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE WE HAVE OF IMPORTANT AND BUILDINGS LIKE, AND THE MAL HOUSE AND MANY, MANY MORE CAST. BUT WE CONTINUE TO GATHER SUPPORT AMONGST OUR WEST SIDE COMMUNITY, CITY STAFF, ELECTED OFFICIALS AND NEW THE H D R C, ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF WORKING CLASS AND POOR PEOPLE, MAL CAPITAS, SHOT HOUSES, AND ANYMORE OUR BUILDING, OUR HISTORY, OUR PEOPLE MATTER AND ARE AS WORTHY OF HISTORIC PROTECTION AS ANY OTHER AREA OF SAN BERNARD. ANTONIO, WE THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE DESIGNATION OF THESE 11 BUILDINGS AS THE FIRST HISTORIC DISTRICT IN THE RED WEBSITE, WHICH HAS THE . THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY IN GETTING YOU ON THE LINE. UM, SO COMMISSIONER, THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA, UM, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL ANY ITEM? I SHOULD ALSO MENTION THAT ITEM EIGHT HAS BEEN POSTPONE TO JULY TO JUNE 17TH AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY BUREAU. I, I'LL NEED TO, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, I'LL NEED TO REFUSE MYSELF FROM ITEM 15. UM, AND I CAN JUST, YOU KNOW, CUT OFF THE CAMERA FOR THE CONSENTS AGENDA. OKAY. I ALSO THINK, UH, I'M GETTING A NOTIFICATION. I'M SORRY. WE ALSO ADDED A CALL IN, UH, SPEAKER, UM, TO ITEM NUMBER 4 4 27 ADAMS. UM, STEPHANIE, DO YOU HAVE THAT ONE? WE'RE UNMUTING STEPHANIE, I HAVE MARGARET, I HAVE MARGARET LEADS ON THE LINE. MARGARET, DO YOU WANNA SHARE YOUR STATEMENT? YES. THANK YOU. I AM REPRESENTING THE KING WILLIAMS ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGARDING THE APPLICATION FOR 4 2 7 ADAMS. THE KING WILLIAMS ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND CONCURS WITH STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE AND TWO. WE CANNOT, HOWEVER, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM THREE, THE SIDE YARD FENCE, AS THERE ARE TOO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICANT'S INTENT. STAFF DOES NOT ADDRESS THE FENCING REQUEST IN THE APPLICABLE CITATION OR FINDINGS. IN REGARD TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES, IT APPEARS ON THE SITE PLAN THAT A PROPOSED FENCE WILL START AT THE GUEST HOUSE AT THE BACK OF THE LOT AND RUN THE FULL DEPTH OF THE LOT TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE. AND I'LL STOP HERE A MOMENT TO REMIND YOU THAT YOU HAVE, UH, A SITE PLAN ATTACHED TO THE LETTER TO YOU. UM, THE DOES NOT TURN, DOES NOT TURN TO ENC CLOSE AN AREA AROUND THE POOL FROM THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, A DRIVEWAY PORTION OF THE EXISTING FENCE ENCLO YARD IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE [00:15:02] COUPLED WITH THE PROPOSED PARALLEL FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY, WILL CREATE AN AWKWARD CONDITION NOT SEEN ANYWHERE ELSE IN KING WILLIAMS. DETAILS REGARDING THE FENCE DESIGN AND MATERIALS ARE NOT MENTIONED, BUT WE RECOMMEND THAT THEY MATCH THE EXISTING FENCE. SO ATTACHED IS THE SITE PLAN WITH OUR SUGGESTED FENCE LOCATION AND A PHOTO TAKEN FROM THE STREET. IN ANY CASE, WE RECOMMEND THAT THE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE SIDE YARD FENCE BE WITHHELD UNTIL THE APPLICANT CAN PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, I DO APOLOGIZE YOU'VE HAD A LOT OF CONFUSION IN THE PAST 30 MINUTES, SO I THINK, I THINK WE'RE ON TRACK NOW. UM, SO WE HAVE, WE'RE RECUSAL FOR ITEM 15. ITEM IS POSTPONED. COREY, THIS IS GABRIEL VELASQUEZ. I, UH, WILL BE RECUSING, UH, FOR ITEM ONE OR JUST THE ENTIRE CONSENT. I, I, I'M, I'M NOT SURE IF I KNOW, UH, THE PROTOCOL. WE HAVE ENOUGH COMMISSIONERS PRESENT TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEM IF BOTH YOU AND COMMISSIONER BOBMAN REFUSE. SO THAT SHOULD BE FINE. THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. THERE'S A FEW, UH, OF THE CONSENT ITEMS I'D LIKE TO PULL FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. OKAY, THAT'S FOUR, WHICH IS 27 ADAMS 5 1 26 AGARITA AND 16 3 0 7 EAST CAROLINA. OKAY. UM, WE'RE PULLING ADAMS FOUR, FIVE, AND 16 FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. WE'RE MARKING THOSE IN PINK. UM, LAUREN, CAN YOU ACTUALLY LOOK THE SAME TO ME AS THE RECUSAL ITEMS? AND THE REFUSAL ITEMS ARE SAME, SO WE MARK THOSE A DIFFERENT COLOR? YEAH. OKAY. ANY OTHER ITEMS? OKAY, SO A MOTION, UM, FOR APPROVAL WOULD BE ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE, SIX THROUGH SEVEN, NINE THROUGH 15 AND 17. MR. CHAIRMAN, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS FOR ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 6 7 9 THROUGH 15 AND ITEM 17, THIS IS COMMISSIONER EZ. I SECOND CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF, UH, ITEMS NOTED. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? HERNANDEZ? AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS? AYE. QUEZ, MS. ACCUSED OLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUDE. AYE. BOWMAN IS RECUSED. BETSON AYE. LA AYE. MOTION CARRIES. SO THAT BRINGS US TO NUMBER, OKAY. WE'RE GONNA MUTE EVERYONE REAL QUICK. AYE, . OKAY. UM, SO WE'RE GONNA DO ITEM FOUR, WHICH [20-3481 Address/Description: 427 ADAMS ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-218 Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Elaine Lutton/LUTTON RICHARD B & ELAINE J Request: Side yard swimming pool installation, landscaping modifications City Council Dist.: 1] IS 4 27 ADAMS. WE'RE GOING TO UNMUTE RACHEL. SHE HAS THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE. UM, BUT I BELIEVE THAT APPLICANT IS LISTENING TO LIVESTREAM AND THAT'S THE FEEDBACK WE'RE HEARING. UM, SO RACHEL, WHEN WE UNMUTE YOU, PLEASE LET THE APPLICANT KNOW I TURN OFF THE LIVESTREAM OR TO AT LEAST MUTE IT. OKAY. RACHEL, ARE YOU THERE? I'M HERE. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES. UM, SO THIS ITEM PULLED FOR, UM, COMMENT. UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT THAT WE HAVE ON THE LINE? UM, THIS IS, THIS IS THE, THE CASE WHERE THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FENCING. COULD YOU, UH, THIS IS HERE. CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THE FENCE REQUEST, DANIEL? YEAH. CAN WE GET THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE MUTE THEIR LIVE STREAM? WAIT, CAN YOU MUTE THE LIVE STREAM PLEASE? YES. OKAY. UM, LAUREN'S GONNA PULL UP THE CASE FILE SO WE CAN DO THE SITE PLAN. [00:20:03] SO I STILL HEAR SOMEBODY'S LIVESTREAM, UM, IF YOU COULD, OH, OKAY. WE'RE, I THINK HE'S HAVING TROUBLE. HANG ON. I'M SORRY. BUTTON THE ME TURN IT OFF. YES, THAT'S MUCH BETTER. OKAY. UM, IF YOU COULD ADVANCE TO SLIDE 11, I THINK THIS SHOWS THE ISSUE BETTER. UM, RACHEL, DO YOU KNOW WHICH SLIDE SHOWS THE THE FENCE SITE PLAN? UM, YES. SO THE PLANET YOU'RE ON CURRENTLY SHOWS THE, THE BEST VERSION OF THE SITE PLAN AVAILABLE IN ACTIVE CASE REQUEST. UM, THE FENCE IN QUESTION WAS APPROVED BY THE H G R R C IN 2018 AND IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT THE SIDER FENCE NOT BE INSTALLED UNTIL POOL WAS APPROVED BY THE H C R C OR THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. UM, SO THAT FENCE PLAN IS NOT IN THIS CASE FILE? YEAH. UM, THERE IS A PREVIOUS REQUEST FROM 2018, UM, THAT SHOWS THIS, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ABLE TO PULL IT UP HERE. UM, BUT ESSENTIALLY THERE IS TWO PORTIONS OF THE, OF THE YARD DIVIDED ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CENTRAL DRIVEWAY. UM, THERE WAS A FENCE REQUEST FROM 2018 THAT WAS APPROVED, UM, THAT WAS FOR BOTH THE IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE YARD AND THEN ALSO THE SIDE YARD. UM, THE SIDE YARD WAS NEVER INSTALLED AND SO THE APPLICANT IS INTENDING TO DO THAT AS PART OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST. SO WE INCLUDED A STIPULATION ABOUT THE FENCE REMAINING AT FOUR FEET BECAUSE NOW WE SEE IT HERE, BUT TECHNICALLY THAT THAT ITEM HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED. THANKS COREY. I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SOME, A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARIFICATION BASED ON THE COMMENTS. UM, UH, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. OKAY. I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND THIS CHAIRMAN FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? YES, I'M SORRY. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? FISH. AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUDE. AYE BOWMAN? AYE. THAT AYE, NOTHING. AYE, MOTION CARRIES. UM, THE NEXT ITEM [20-3472 Address/Description: 126 E AGARITA AVE HDRC Case No.: 2020-219 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: catherine nored/nored architecture Request: Construction of a 1-story side addition with a partial second story City Council Dist.: 1] IS ITEM 5 1 26 EAST AGARITA. UM, LET'S UNMUTE STEPHANIE SINCE SHE'S THE CASE MANAGER. THIS WAS PULLED FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION. YES, I HAVE THE APPLICANT, CATHERINE, ON THE LINE. THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I ACTUALLY DIDN'T, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS DIRECTLY FOR CATHERINE. I JUST WANTED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, MAKE THE APPLICANT AWARE THAT THE MONTE VISTA, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAD, UH, SOME CONCERNS, I THINK, UH, THAT IN THE PROCESS FROM CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO FINAL APPROVAL THAT, UH, THERE'S SOME SOME GOOD POINTS IN, IN THAT LETTER ABOUT, UH, LOT COVERAGE AND RATIOS. AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD, UH, INCLUDE IN THE EXHIBITS FOR FINAL APPROVAL, UH, SOME OF THOSE ITEMS THAT, THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND, AND I DON'T OBJECT. I I AGREE WITH, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS HERE AND I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER SECOND. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. . AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUDE. AYE. BOWMAN? AYE. RED SIR? AYE, NOTHING. AYE, RUSSIAN CURTIS? UM, UM, NO, I SEE IT MOVED OVER NOW. SO ITEM 16, 3 0 7, EAST CAROLINA. [20-3467 Address/Description: 307 E CAROLINA ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-215 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: JEFF COYLE/COYLE JEFFREY M & KATIE J JARL Request: Rear privacy fence replacement with 8-foot rear privacy fence City Council Dist.: 1] WE WILL UNMUTE RACHEL LOOKIN. THIS ITEM WAS RULE FOR, UH, MR. COMMENT [00:25:03] AND MY APOLOGIES, I DO NOT YET HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE AND I CAN CALL HIM NOW. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD AND DO THAT. UH, WELL, WHILE THE APPLICANT IS COMING ONTO THE LINE, I JUST, I, I PULLED THIS ITEM. THIS ITEM IS A FENCE REQUEST FOR A GREATER THAN SIX FOOT PIPE FENCE. AND IN LA LAVACCA AND, UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST WORTH, UH, A LOOK AND A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THIS EXTRA TWO FEET WAS BEING ACHIEVED AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S APPROPRIATE AND IN LAVACCA. SO SURE. UM, COMMISSIONER'S FILE FOR THAT. UM, THERE'S, LET'S LOOK AT THE LOCATION MAP IF WE CAN FIRST. UM, SO THAT WAS PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION. UM, SO THIS HOUSE IS IN THE LOCKER STORE DISTRICT, UM, NOT IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO BUT ONE PROPERTY INN FROM THE, UM, ACCESS ROAD FOR I 37. UM, AND SO THEY WERE REQUESTING ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, UM, BECAUSE OF SOME SECURITY CONCERNS BEING THAT CLOSE TO THE HIGHWAY NOISE AS WELL. UM, IF YOU GO DOWN TO THE, UH, YEAH, THE FINISHED DESIGN. SO SLIDE 10 IS WHAT'S PROPOSED. UM, LET'S UNMUTE RACHEL, SHE SEE IF SHE'S HAD LEFT OR THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU, CORY. I HAVE, AND I HAVE JUST THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE. NOW. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, CAN YOU, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE NEED FOR THIS ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ABOVE SIX FEET FEET AND HOW YOU INTENDED ON ACCOMPLISHING THAT? SURE. AND ACTUALLY SINCE WE'VE, UM, UH, BEEN CON UH, CON TALKING WITH OUR CONTRACTOR, UH, I THINK EIGHT IS PROBABLY HIGHER THAN WE NEED TO GO, UH, BOTH FOR AESTHETICS AND, UH, AND A GOOD SOLID STRUCTURE OF THE FENCE. SO, UM, I THINK WHAT THIS POINT, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A SIX FOOT FENCE WITH AN ADDITIONAL FOOT OF THE, UH, LATTICE TREATMENT AROUND THE, AROUND THE TOP OF IT. UM, THE PURPOSE OF IT REALLY IS, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE AT THE END OF CAROLINA STREET. WE'RE VERY CLOSE TO, UH, 37, UM, AND, AND WE'D LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA, UM, BUFFER. UH, WE ALSO JUST FRANKLY THINK THE FENCE IS A MORE ATTRACTIVE, UH, TREATMENT, UH, AS YOU SEE FROM SOME OF THE PICTURES, I'D SAY SCROLLING THROUGH NOW, UM, ONE OF THE FENCES ON THE SIDE ALREADY HAS, UH, SOMETHING THAT GOES ABOVE SIX FEET. IT WAS NOT PUT THERE BY US, IT WAS A NEIGHBOR AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST. UH, BUT IT'S JUST STANDARD PLYWOOD, UH, EXTENDING UP ABOVE THE SIX FEET. UM, SO WE'D LIKE TO JUST, AS WE BUILD THE FENCE, GO, GO AROUND THE BACK AND PUT THAT EXTRA FOOT OF, OF TREATMENT AND MAKE IT STAND OUT AND ALSO PROVIDE US A LITTLE BIT OF PRIVACY AND, AND BUFFER FROM THE, UH, BUSY INTERSTATE NEXT DOOR. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AGAIN. UM, I LOOK PRETTY NEAR, NEAR HERE AND I UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT COME FROM THE EAST ON I 37 IN TERMS OF, UH, NOISE SECURITY AND, AND INCREASINGLY, UH, LIGHT INFILTRATION AND POLLUTION. SO TO THE NEEDS, PARTICULARLY RIGHT HERE, UH, UH, FENCE, FENCE HEIGHT REQUESTS ABOVE THE U D C ALLOWED THING ARE FOR ME QUITE PROBLEMATIC. UM, I THINK GENERALLY WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING HERE IS APPROPRIATE, AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THE NEED. ARE YOU WRAPPING THIS, UH, THIS FENCE AROUND THE ENTIRE BACKYARD OR IS THIS ONLY ON THE EAST SIDE? NO, THE, THE INTENT WOULD BE FOR IT TO GO AROUND THE FULL THING FOR, FOR CONSISTENCY. I MEAN, I'M, I'M STRUGGLING, UH, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS A LITTLE BIT AND I KNOW WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CASES TODAY THAT, THAT, UH, HAVE, UH, ADDITIONAL HEIGHT REQUESTS ON FENCE FOR VARIOUS REASONS, INCLUDING PRIVACY. UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO GET SOME OF THE THOUGHTS FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS IF, IF THEY HAVE ANY, ANY TO ADD TO THIS DISCUSSION. I, THIS IS COMMISSIONER RUBE. UM, I FEEL LIKE THE, UH, AND, AND I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER FISH'S CONCERN, AND I DO AGREE, UM, WE ARE MOSTLY, YOU KNOW, MOSTLY OF THE TIMES WE DO ACTUALLY DON'T ALLOW MORE THAN SIX FEET. AND VERY, VERY RARELY DO WE ALLOW THE EIGHT, UM, EIGHT. UM, I, I LIKE THE TOP PORTION, THE TWO EXTRA FEET ADDITIONALLY GIVES A LITTLE BIT OF TRANSPARENCY. I THINK THAT HAS BEEN A SOLUTION IN PREVIOUS CASES FOR US TO KIND OF MITIGATE A LITTLE BIT OF THE IMPACT OF THE EIGHT P VERSUS THE SIX. UM, BUT I, I ALSO AGREE WOULD LIKE [00:30:01] TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS. UM, THIS IS A CASE BY CASE SITUATION, SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S REASON ENOUGH TO SAY THAT WE HAVE SEVERAL CASES, UH, AND THIS, YOU KNOW, WITH THE SAME REQUEST, SAME AS, UH, MANY TIMES. I MEAN, THIS IS THE REASON WHY WE'RE HERE. AND I, UM, IN THIS CASE, BY CASE OF PRIVACY, UNFORTUNATE SECURITY, I WOULD SAY IS IT'S A FAIRLY GOOD REASON. SO THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UM, I GENERALLY THINK THAT, UH, UH, THIS IS AN ATTRACTIVE PROPOSAL, UH, GIVEN THE, THE ISSUES THAT THEY HAVE CITED, THOUGH I, I KIND OF QUESTION WHETHER THE ADDITIONAL FOOTAGE IS REALLY GOING TO GIVE THEM THE FUNCTIONALITY THAT THEY'RE ASKING JUST GIVEN THE, THE, UH, THE ELEVATED NATURE THAT THE FREEWAY THERE. UM, BUT IF THEY'RE WILLING TO GO DOWN TO SIX FEET AND HAVE SEVEN, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE, UH, THE UPPER, UH, SEVEN FEET, UH, DISTANCE, FEET, UH, OF THE LATTICE, THEN I, I CAN SUPPORT THAT RATHER THAN GOING TO A FULL EIGHT FEET. MR. COMMISSIONER GIBBS, I, UM, I AGREE, UH, WITH, UM, ALSO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, UM, WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I, I AGREE THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE, UM, THE LATTICE, I, I THINK IT'S A BEAUTIFUL ADDITION, BUT I'M, WELL, I'M STRUGGLING ABOVE THE SIX FEET AS WELL. AND I THINK I WAS BILL SUPPORT THE, UM, IF IT INCLUDING THE LETTER, IT WOULDN'T BE ABOVE SIX FEET BECAUSE I, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF THE APPLICANT AND ALSO WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER OF FISHER SAYING ABOUT, UM, BEING FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA, AND HE'S FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THE ISSUES THERE. BUT I'M JUST WITH THE, THE HEIGHT ABOVE SIX, THIS IS COMMISSIONER, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AGAIN, AND I'M, I'M REALLY ON THE FENCE ABOUT IT. I THINK THAT THE, THE APPLICANT, THE REDUCTION IN THAT, IN THAT HEIGHT AND UH, STAFF IS, IS SUGGESTING THAT THAT MIGHT NOT BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE FENCE, WHICH IS I THINK WHY THEY'RE SUPPORTING IT. I THINK IT IT AT, AT AT LEAST A ONE FOOT LOWER HEIGHT, I THINK I CAN SUPPORT IT. BUT I KNOW THESE THINGS ARE A CASE BY CASE BASIS AND I, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA. UH, MY, MY WORRY ABOUT SUPPORTING IT, UH, COMES ON THE, THE, UH, NEXT FOUR FENCE APPLICATIONS ON THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING THIS ONE REQUESTING SOME ELEMENT OF ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. SO I'M, I, I HESITANTLY SUPPORT THIS WITH A TOTAL HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET. SO I, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET. THIS IS, I I HAVE A, UM, I KNOW THERE'S A MOTION, BUT, UH, IF, IF THERE'S A SECOND I'D LIKE TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER I SECOND MOTION? UM, UH, CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN FETZER. I HAVE SOME, UH, COMMENTS THAT, THAT, UM, UH, I, I, FOR ME ARE, ARE THE KEY. UH, I THINK IT'S A, A, A, A BEAUTIFUL SOLUTION IN GENERAL. UM, AND I KNOW THAT THAT REQUESTS FOR, UM, ADDITIONAL, UM, OFFENSE IS TYPICALLY THAT IT'S TRANSPARENT AND IT'S NOT, UM, UH, TOTAL PRIVACY. SO IT MEETS, IT MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR, FOR RAISING THE HEIGHT OF OFFENSE IN, IN, IN THE WAY THAT, UH, IT'S TYPICALLY PRESCRIBED, RIGHT? BUT, UH, AND, AND MY, MY ISSUE IS, AND NOT, UH, UH, THINKING THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE OR THAT IT'S APPROVABLE, BUT THAT, THAT WE, WE'VE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE PEOPLE ARE DEALING WITH REALLY SERIOUS CRIME ISSUES IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. AND WE'VE SAID NO, I, I, I, MY MY MY HOPE IS NOT SO MUCH THAT THIS IS NOT, UH, SOMETHING THAT ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS CAN BE SEEN FOR APPROVAL, BUT THAT IT ALSO HELPS US TO INFORM WHAT WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN SAYING YES. AND, AND THAT INCLUDES O UH, THE OFFICE OF PRESERVATION AS WELL. WE LISTEN TO WHAT ARE THE SILENT, UH, INDICATORS THAT GIVE US THAT NUDGE TO SAY YES IN THIS CASE, BUT YET DON'T GIVE US THAT SAME NUDGE TO SAY YES IN THE CASE WHERE SOMEONE'S BEEN BROKEN INTO AND THEY, THEY WANNA RAISE RECYCLED, AND CLEARLY THE DEMOGRAPHIC WOULD SHOW THE CRIME STATISTIC WOULD SHOW THAT THEY'RE REALLY NEED ONE. SO I, I COULD, I COULD SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT IS A, A BEAUTIFUL SOLUTION. I COULD SEE YOU ARE LOOKING ON, ON, UH, AT AN ANGLE FROM 2 81, IT, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF INCHES AT THAT DISTANCE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. BUT I, [00:35:01] I WOULD JUST LOOK TO MY COMMISSIONERS AS WELL TO USE THE SAME TYPE OF LOGIC, UH, UH, TO BE, TO BE, UH, FAIR, UH, UH, AND, AND IN, IN SITUATIONS WHERE, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I, I DON'T, I, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE THAT I, THAT I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THIS AND WHY THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE, BUT WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE CASES AS, AS, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER OFFICIALS NOTING AND WE'LL SEE HOW WE THINK AT THE TIME. OKAY, SURE. THAT'S, THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER. I'D LIKE TO JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT. I THINK, UH, IN MY OWN MIND, UH, UH, HOW I DISTINGUISH IT IS SOME OF THOSE CASES THAT WE'VE SAID NO TO, WERE INVOLVING FRONT YARD FENCES OR FENCES THAT WENT ACROSS DRIVEWAYS. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AND I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO THE, THE ISSUES OF SECURITY AND, AND, UM, UH, BOTH TO PHYSICAL, UH, PROPERTY TO, TO PERSONAL, UH, WELLBEING. BUT, YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT POINT GUARD FENCES, AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A FENCE THAT'S SITTING IN FRONT OF THE FRONT PLANE OF THE, OF THE HOUSE. SO I THINK THOSE ARE, UH, FOR ME, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE, THE GUIDELINES THAT I, I LOOK AT, UH, TO HELP, YOU KNOW, UH, DETERMINE WHETHER A VARIATION CAN BE SEEN, I THINK IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD AS YOU GO FURTHER WEST, WHERE THERE'S LESS VALIDITY IN MY MIND TO HAVE A FENCE BE TALLER BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING FURTHER AND FURTHER AWAY FROM THE SORT OF THE NUISANCE SOURCES OF SOUND AND LIGHT FROM THE FREEWAY. SO THOSE WERE MY THOUGHTS. JUST TO SHARE, UH, WITH OUR FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AGAIN, AND I, AND I, I THINK, UH, THE POINT THAT COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ BROUGHT UP, UH, IS IMPORTANT TO EXPLAIN WHY WE MIGHT SUPPORT THIS, UH, SPECIFICALLY. AND I SHARE, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER'S THOUGHTS. UM, I, I, I DON'T THINK THE SECURITY ISSUE IS A REASONABLE JUSTIFICATION FOR ANY ADDITIONAL HEIGHT HERE. WHAT I THINK THAT I, I'M, I'M LEANING TOWARD APPROVAL ON THIS, UH, BECAUSE, UH, ITS, ITS IMPACT IN THIS AREA AROUND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, UH, WILL NOT BE SIGNIFICANT. UH, THERE'S ALREADY EVIDENCE OF FENCE, LIKE ELEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN EXTRUDED UP, UH, AT, AT A HEIGHT THAT'S REQUESTED, AND THERE IS, UH, NUISANCE STUFF COMING, PARTICULARLY FROM THE WEST. I DON'T THINK I WOULD SUPPORT THIS, UH, FURTHER WEST OR NECESSARILY THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT. SO THERE, I THINK THERE ARE SOME VERY SPECIFIC CONCEPTUAL ISSUES HERE, UH, THAT IS LEANING ME THAT WAY, BUT I DO IT WITH HESITATION AND, AND I, I THINK, I THINK I CAN SAY THAT I DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TO BE A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE ON WHICH WAY I THINK ONE OF THESE SHOULD GO. AND, AND, UH, IT'S A LITTLE BIT ON THE EDGE FOR ME. UM, COMMISSIONER ALA, I, I, THERE'S A MOTION ALREADY AND I, I, I WOULDN'T VOTE AGAINST THAT MOTION, BUT I, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE A I, I THINK I, I GO OR I FEEL, UH, SIMILAR TO COMMISSIONER ROSKI, I'M, I'M CURIOUS HOW CONSISTENT WE ARE TODAY WITH, WITH FENCES. THIS IS COMMISSIONER UNE. UM, I DON'T SEE THAT THE LATTICE WORK ON TOP OF THE SIX FOOT FENCE IS GONNA BE MUCH, IF ANY KIND OF A BARRIER TO SOUND OR VISION. SO I, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT. OKAY. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, WE, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR A MAXIMUM HEIGHT TO SEVEN FOOT. UM, HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ A AYE FISH. AYE. GIBBS NAY. QUEZ AYE. OLA? AYE. ER, AYE GROUP. AYE. BOWMAN? AYE. THATOR, NAYYY. LAMAN. NAYYY. I HAVE SEVEN A'S SO WITH MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, [20-3478 Address/Description: 415 WILLOW ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-200 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Aldo Ramirez /ARLA Corp Request: Amendments to a previously approved design regarding windows City Council Dist.: 2] AGENDA ITEM 18. LET'S UNMUTE EDWARD FOR THAT ONE. AGENDA ITEM 18 H D R C CASE NUMBER 20 2204 15 WILLOW. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO AMEND THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN REGARDING WINDOW FENESTRATION ON THE STREET BASING FACADE. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO MODIFY THE THREE GAINED WINDOWS UNDER THE SECOND STORY GABLE TO FEATURE TWO WINDOWS FOR THE TWO GAINED WINDOWS UNDER THE FIRST STORY BAY TO FEATURE TWO SEPARATE WINDOW OPENINGS THAT DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH C C O A FOR AN APPROPRIATE WINDOW WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 4TH, 2020. [00:40:01] AN AMENDMENT TO THIS APPROVAL WAS PREVIOUSLY DENIED BY THE COMMISSION ON MAY 1ST, 2020. THAT DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS NEWLY PROPOSED AMENDMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDED THE APPLICANT WITH THE ORIGINAL C O A ISSUED ON MARCH 4TH, 2020. HEY, IS THE APPLICANT THERE? YES, THIS IS AMBER RAMIREZ, THE BUILDER. I'M REPRESENTING MY CUSTOMER, THE OWNER OF THE HOME. THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. YES. UM, WE CAN HEAR YOU. UM, COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THIS IS COMM COMMISSIONER GROUP. I, I ACTUALLY REMEMBER THIS CASE. UM, YOU ALSO INSTALLED THE WINDOWS PRIOR TO WITHOUT A PERMIT THEN, THEN WE CAME TO AN AGREEMENT OF SOME OF THE CHANGES. UM, SO MAKE ME UNDERSTAND AGAIN, WHY IS THERE A MISUNDERSTANDING HERE ABOUT WHAT WE AGREED ON AT THE LAST MEETING? WELL, UNFORTUNATELY I WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE LAST MEETING. THERE WAS MY, I CLIENT, THE, THE OWNER. SO HE, HE TRIED TO AT BEST AS POSSIBLE RELAY WHAT WAS SAID TO HIM. SO I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WAS A MISINTERPRETATION THERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO NECESSARILY WORK WITH MR. HALL, TRY TO COME TO A SOLUTION. REASON THING IS THAT GIVEN FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, ESPECIALLY WITH WHAT IS GOING IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW WITH THE PANDEMIC, MY CLIENT IS UNABLE TO, TO PAY FOR THOSE, THOSE WINDOWS THAT YOU ALL, UH, WANT. THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO. THIS HAS BEEN A DREAM HOUSE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS. THESE TIMES WERE DESIGNED IN 2017. SO IT IS BEEN A UPHILL BATTLE FOR HIM. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO HELP HIM AS BEST AS I CAN. . SO THIS INFORMATION GROUP AGAIN, UM, I THINK IT WAS VERY CLEAR THE LAST MEETING, AND OF COURSE YOU ALSO GET THAT INVITING FROM STAFF AND THERE'S ALSO, YOU KNOW, ACCESS TO RECORDINGS TO CLARIFY, I THINK THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY, UM, FAIRLY, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A VERY GOOD COMPROMISE WHEN HE CAME. I, I, I TEND TO AGREE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. UM, YOU SAID YOU WERE THE BUILDER, YOU ORIGINALLY THE BUILDER. DID YOU GUYS GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE POWERPOINT THAT MY CLIENT, UH, CAME UP WITH THAT I, THAT I, UH, UPLOADED AT THE APPLICATION FOR THIS C R C? PERHAPS STAFF CAN READ ONE OF THE FINDINGS THAT MAY PROVIDE A LITTLE CLARITY AS TO, UH, WHAT WAS APPROVED AT THE LAST HEARING AND WHAT WAS DENIED. UM, SO THIS IS THE SECOND FINDING PROCESS. OKAY. I HAVE THE SHEET HERE. I HAVE THE, UM, THE, I THINK SHE SENT OVER THE, I'M JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHY. AND WE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THIS TO YOU, MR. HALL. THERE IS, I HAVE EXAMPLES OF 27 HOUSES THAT DO NOT HAVE THE ITEM COLLATERAL WOODEN WINDOWS IN THE DISTRICT. SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING ON PRESIDENT, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ASK FOR WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS RECEIVED IN THE PAST. I UNDERSTAND THAT IS CASE BY CASE. UH, SO I'M JUST PERPLEXED SO MY CLIENT AS TO WHY WE CAN'T HAVE THE SAME AS EVERYBODY ELSE HAS HAD IN MY EXAMPLES IN THE POWERPOINT I'VE PROVIDED. SO ONCE AGAIN, UH, STAFF CAN READ THE FINDINGS. THIS IS THE SECOND FINDING PROPERTY HISTORY. THE SITE VISIT WAS CONDUCTED ON MARCH 26TH, 2020, WHERE O H B STAFF OBSERVED WORK BEING DONE OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF APPROVAL. THAT INCLUDED THE INSTALLATION OF ALUMINUM WINDOWS. BEAR WITH ME A SECOND. INSTALLATION OF ALUMINUM WINDOWS, THE INSTALLATION OF AN ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF. THE INSTALLATION OF GRAIN COMPOSITE SIDING. THE INSTALLATION OF GABLE RETURNS ADMINISTRATION PATTERNS THAT WERE INCONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. THE SOFTWARE ORDER WAS ISSUED DURING THE SITE VISIT. SINCE THAT TIME, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO REMOVE THE GABLE RETURNS AND INSTALL SMOOTH SIDING. THE REMAINING UNAPPROVED ITEMS WERE REVIEWED BY THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION ON MAY 1ST, 2020, WHERE THE INSTALL ALUMINUM WINDOWS WERE DENIED THAT THE DENIED WINDOW SHOULD BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR ANY ADDITIONAL REQUEST OR DESIGN AMENDMENT. OKAY, SURE. AND I'M SEEING HERE, I'M LOOKING AT DIRECTLY AT YOUR GUYS, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION WINDOWS AND I CAN EASILY ADD MORE CASING AND A FILL. I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER. I'M JUST NOT SURE WHAT, UH, I FIND TO NOT HAVE THE FINANCES TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS AND GET NEW WOODEN WINDOWS OR JUST HE CAN'T, IF NOT WANTING TO BE JUST MONETARY, HE CAN'T, THAT'S THE MAIN CONCERN FOR HIM. [00:45:02] IS THE APPLICANT ALSO AWARE OF THE, UM, TAX RAISE AND THE MONETARY, UM, YOU KNOW, CONTRIBUTION THAT THE CITY HAS AVAILABLE IF HE DOES DO THE CHANGES AND COMPLETE THE WORK THAT APPLIES TO HISTORICAL? OH YEAH, THAT'S THIS, THIS IS NEW CONSTRUCTION. SO NEW CONSTRUCTION. WELL, I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A PROP POINT, BUT, BUT IT'S RIGHT NOW ON THE SCREEN IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT I HAVE ON A P D F AND THAT'S WHAT I READ, UM, PRIOR TO THE MEETING. UM, YOU CAN'T JUST REALLY ADD A SALE. AND I THINK THAT WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME IS, YOU KNOW, THE FRONT WINDOWS ARE VERY IMPORTANT. UM, IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU WANNA WITHDRAW AND COME BACK WITH MORE OPTIONS FROM THE NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WOULD HELP YOUR CASE, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN DECIDE TO DO THAT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, HELPING MUCH. AND IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU WANT US TO SHOW US THAT, THAT'S FINE. THE FRONT WINDOWS, THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S IMPORTANT ON THE PROPERTY. IT'S WHAT WE REALLY ARE FOCUSING ON. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GONNA ADD A SEAL IN THE MIDDLE OR I MEAN THE CASING. YES, BUT THESE ARE NOT, WE WOULD, I MEAN, WE RECOMMEND 1 0 1. UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ. YOU, YOU KNOW, I, I REMEMBER, I REMEMBER THIS, UH, AS WELL, UH, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THE, UH, ATTENTION WAS, UH, TAKEN AWAY FROM THE HOUSE AS A WHOLE AND FOCUSED ON THE FRONT, WHICH TO ME IS, UH, A A ALONG THE LINES OF A FELLOW COMMISSIONER GROUP WAS SAYING IS, UM, UM, UH, REALLY A BIT OF AN OLIVE BRANCH. THAT'S NOT TYPICAL. UM, ONE, ONE OF THE THINGS THOUGH, I THINK THAT'S NOT HELPING THE SITUATION IS WE HAVE TO BE VERY DIRECT WITH THE, WITH THE EXPECTATION. UH, I, I THINK COMMISSION GOES, I'M, I'M NOT ALL THAT, UH, CRITICAL ABOUT GOOD WINDOWS. UM, SO, SO MY COMMENTS AREN'T SO MUCH ABOUT WHAT, WHAT WINDOW I THINK IS A GOOD WINDOW OR NOT A GOOD WINDOW, BUT, BUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT THE, THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO LEAVE THIS MEETING WITH A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THIS COMMISSION IS EXPECTING, UH, I THINK THERE'S A STRAIGHT ANSWER. UM, THE, THE, THE, HE, HE'S MAKING THE, THE, THE CASE THAT THERE'S WINDOWS LIKE THIS IN OTHER PLACES. AND I THINK THAT THE COMMISSION IS MAKING THE CASE THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT, THERE IS OTHER PLACES THAT THERE'S AN EXPECTATION FOR ALL OF THE WINDOWS, BUT IN THIS CASE, PARTICULARLY THE FRONT WINDOWS, I, I THINK MY INTERPRETATION OF WHAT, WHAT, WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M HEARING IS ACCURATE, BUT I, I THINK THAT IT'S, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE, FOR THE APPLICANT TO BE ABLE TO LEAVE KNOWING THAT, THAT THE WINDOWS ARE NOT GONNA FLY OR THEY'RE, OR, OR, OR THEY WILL. AND I'M, I'M HEARING THAT, THAT THE STRAIGHT ANSWER IS THAT, THAT THE FRONT WINDOWS ARE NOT GONNA TO BE ACCEPTABLE AND THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE A REPLACEMENT, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE A ONE OVER ONE AND THEY'D HAVE TO HAVE A, UH, YOU KNOW, THE LINES THAT, THAT, UH, UH, ARE EXPECTED. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT IS NOT ABLE TO TO DO THAT. I, I THINK STAFF, MAYBE YOU COULD HELP THE, THE APPLICANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT POSITION THE APPLICANT IS IN IF THEY ARE FINANCIALLY STRAPPED AND CAN'T, CAN'T DO IT ANYWAY. UM, BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CONVERSATION IS VERY CLEAR AND STRAIGHTFORWARD, BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'RE GONNA GO BACK AND FORTH ALL THESE WINDOWS. UM, I, I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT AND I MEAN, I HONESTLY STILL GET THE REQUEST. I FEEL LIKE MY EXAMPLES AND I CAN, I CAN ADDRESS BEING IGNORED. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE THAT HAVE USED PURELY ALUMINUM AND EVEN AL IGN ARE ALLOWED TO, BUT I'M NOT, I'M NOT EVEN ASKING FOR AL I'M SIMPLY ASKING FOR A COMPROMISE FOR ALUMINUM GIVEN MY CUSTOMERS RECENT HARDSHIPS, AGAIN, THAT NOBODY EXPECTED THAT HAPPEN, OTHER THAN, I DON'T WANT THAT TO SOUND LIKE A CHEAP PLOY, BUT IT'S SIMPLY BE THE TRUTH. SO I, I GUESS YOU'RE RIGHT. I DO, I DO NEED A DIRECT ANSWER. SO WHAT COULD BE THE BEST TO, TO GET TO A COMPROMISE? THAT WAY YOU DON'T GO BACK AND FORTH, AND I DON'T WANNA WASTE THE BOARD'S TIME. I NEED TO KEEP, I NEED TO KEEP MOVING FORWARD SINCE MY CUSTOMER IS PAYING, UH, TAXES IS PAYING HIS LOAN. SO I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT. I MEAN, WE DO WANNA MOVE FORWARD FROM THIS, JUST HOPING THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN. UM, SO FROM, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, UH, IT'S, IT APPEARS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY, UH, OFFERED UP THAT COMPROMISE WITH THESE FOUR WINDOWS. UM, AND I THINK THAT THAT IS THE GENERAL CONSENSUS OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR. AND I, I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH 'EM. UM, I, I DO KNOW THAT, UH, HAVING TO SWITCH OUT FOUR WINDOWS IS, UH, AN ISSUE. I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE FOR ANYBODY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT [00:50:01] FOR US AS PROFESSIONALS TO UNDERSTAND OUR PLACE IN THIS PROCESS AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WHENEVER WE ARE WORKING ON A PROJECT LIKE THIS, AND WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH OUR CLIENTS AND REGARDLESS OF, OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE DIRECTION THAT PEOPLE WANNA GO, WE ALWAYS HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE ARE RULES AND THAT THERE, THERE ARE THINGS THAT GOVERN THESE TYPES OF SITUATIONS. UM, AND WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE PAY ATTENTION TO THOSE THINGS BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE COSTLY IMPACTS IF THEY'RE NOT FOLLOWED. AND SO I THINK THAT, UH, I WOULD AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT THESE FOUR WINDOWS ARE A VERY FAIR COMPROMISE TO HAVE THESE REPLACED BECAUSE THEY MAKE THE MOST IMPACT ON THE HISTORICAL NATURE OF THIS HOME. AND SO I WOULD, UH, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S, THAT IS THE COMPROMISE COMMISSIONER, I WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT IS REQUESTED TODAY. UM, SO WHEN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION WAS APPROVED, HOWEVER, MANY MONTHS AGO, THERE WAS A WINDOW SPEC THAT WAS APPROVED AND FOUND IN THE GUIDELINES. WHAT WAS INSTALLED WAS A WINDOW PRODUCT THAT DID NOT MEET THE GUIDELINES. NOT ONLY BECAUSE IN SOME CASES THEY'RE FIXED, LIKE YOU SEE, BUT EVEN THE ONES THAT ARE SASHED ARE NOT, NOT THE QUALITY NOR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE APPROVAL. SO THAT CAME BEFORE YOU FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL OR, OR APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLED WINDOWS ASSETS. UM, THERE WAS A COMPROMISE DISCUSSED THAT MEETING ABOUT RELOCATING SOME OF THE SAS WINDOWS TO THE FRONT FACADE, UM, THAT WAS NOT, ENDED UP NOT BEING PART OF THE APPROVED MOTION. UM, AND SO WHAT IS REQUESTED TO, WELL, SO WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO DO IS GO BACK THROUGHOUT THE HOME WITH THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THAT, BUT WHAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DO IN THIS REQUEST IS REUSE SOME OF THE NON-APPROVED WINDOWS THAT HAVE SASHES HERE ON THE FRONT, SPECIFICALLY TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE WITH THESE BEING FIXED. AND, AND CORY, IS THERE AN, AN ADMINISTRATION OF THE, OF THAT VERY WINDOW THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? NO, UM, I MEAN THE PHOTOS, UM, SO THEY'RE, THEY'RE BEING MOVED FROM THE SIDE. SO YOU CAN SEE THERE'S STASH WINDOWS ON THE SIDE. UM, THIS IS THE APPROVED SET. THIS IS NOT ACTUALLY QUITE WHAT WAS INSTALLED. AND SO THE PHOTOS WILL BE A BETTER EXAMPLE, BUT THEN THAT, BUT THAT MEANS THAT, THAT, I THINK BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW WHAT WINDOWS, UH, LOOK LIKE IN OUR IMAGINATIONS, RIGHT? THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT WINDOW THAT'S ON THE FRONT IS THE WINDOW. BUT, BUT WITH THE SASH, NOT JUST THE PLATE GLASS, BUT IT'S THE SAME ANODIZED ALUMINUM, IT'S THE SAME PRODUCT, IT'S JUST, UH, ONE OVER ONE WINDOW, RIGHT? SO WE REVIEW, WE'VE REVIEWED THE OPERATION STYLE OF WINDOW, BUT WE ALSO REVIEW LIKE THE DIMENSION AND PROFILE AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS WITH THE WINDOW PRODUCT AGAINST THE GUIDELINES. AND SO WE DID NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WINDOWS THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED WINDOWS THAT NEVER WERE INSTALLED BE INSTALLED INSTEAD OF THESE, THOSE WERE APPROVED WHEN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION CAME THROUGH. THAT WAS WHAT WAS SPECIFIED WHILE WHAT'S ULTIMATELY INSTALLED IS NOT THE APPROVED WINDOW. AND, AND COREY, THE WINDOW THAT, THAT YOU'RE SAYING, UH, WAS APPROVED, IS THAT A WINDOW THAT IS THAT THAT WAS ALREADY PURCHASED AND IS ON SITE AND THEN THEY CHOSE NOT TO USE IT OR, OKAY, SO THIS IS THE WHOLE LINE OF PRODUCT THERE THAT'S JUST, IT'S COMPLETELY NOT APPROVED. UH, I, I MEAN IN TERMS OF, UH, O O H PIECE, UH, RIGHT. AND SO THE REQUEST TODAY IS, IS A REQUEST TO REUSE SOME OF THESE WINDOWS IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE NUMBER THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE FULLY REQUEST. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. I THINK I JUST WANNA, UH, MY RECOGNITION. I, I THINK THAT'S WHY ALSO THERE'S SO MANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC THAT THERE'S WORK DONE OUTSIDE OF APPROVED. THIS WAS APPROVED. I MEAN, WE APPROVED A SET OF DRAWINGS THAT APPROVED THE MATERIAL. WE APPROVED A WINDOW AND, AND THE, AND THE, WHICH WAS NOT INSTALLED. THE APPLICANT COMES BACK. WE COME TO A COMPROMISE. I THINK THAT'S, WE REALLY HAVE TO STAND BY WHAT WE DECIDED IN THE LAST MEETING WAS A VOTE ON IT. IT WAS APPROVED. I, I STILL STAND BY WHAT I SAY IS DIFFICULT TO REALLY, I MEAN, IT WOULD JUST BE MITIGATING SOMETHING. I JUST DON'T, DON'T, I WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING THAT. UM, ALSO IN RELATION TO POSSIBLE FUTURE PROJECTS. YEAH, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER . UM, WHEN THIS CASE CAME TO US, UM, IN MARCH, IT, IT, IT, IT HAD NOT FOLLOWED, BUT WE HAD APPROVED, UH, WE CAME TO A COMPROMISE. AND, AND I THINK THAT EVEN THOUGH AS, AS THE, UH, BUILDER ON THE CALL MENTIONED THAT THERE'S OTHER, UM, HOUSES THAT HE'S SEEN, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE RULES ARE HERE FOR. SO THAT WE MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF [00:55:01] HISTORIC OF THIS AREA, AND WE, IF WE KEEP ON ALLOWING IT, THEN THERE WON'T BE ANY MORE CHARACTER JUST BECAUSE WE SEE IT ALL OVER THE, THE, UH, PEOPLE THAT HAVE NOT FOLLOWED THE RULES. SO I, I AM WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER GRUEN. I FEEL THAT WE, I, I WOULD STICK TO WHAT WE SAID ON THE LAST, UM, LAST MEETING, THIS COMMISSIONER UNE. UM, TO ME, THIS IS JUST ANOTHER CASE OF AN APPLICANT GETTING APPROVAL ON A CERTAIN ITEM FOR, UH, A BUILDING AND THEN JUST ARBITRARILY INSTALLING SOMETHING THAT IS NOT APPROVED. AND WE SEE THIS FAR TOO OFTEN. SO I'M, I'M OPPOSED TO APPROVING THE EXISTING INSTALL WINDOWS. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. AND I WOULD, UH, ECHO WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAD SAID THAT, UM, GOING BACK TO WHAT WAS INITIALLY APPROVED, WHICH WAS I BELIEVE, UM, ALUMINUM CLA WOOD WINDOWS IS WHAT'S APPROPRIATE HERE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UM, I DO RECALL IN THE LAST HEARING THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT MAYBE OVER TRIMMING OR OVER FRAMING ON SOME OF THE WINDOWS SO THAT THEY COULD BE KEPT. UM, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION FROM THE LAST MEETING, UH, IS THAT IT, IT DID NOT INCLUDE THAT AND IT WAS A DENIAL OF THESE WINDOWS. IS THAT CORRECT? SO GO AHEAD, EDWARD. EVERYBODY THERE? UH, YES. I, I THINK I JUMPED OUT FOR A SECOND. SOME, ALL THE WINDOWS IN THE PREVIOUS REQUESTS WERE DENIED. UH, SO WHAT STAFF IS, IS SAYING TODAY IS THAT ALL OF THE WINDOWS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY DENIED NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, UM, BY OR THROUGH THE INSTALLATION OF THE WINDOWS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY APPROVED WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. UM, YOU KNOW, THIS CASE, UH, NOTHING WILL MARK IN MY MIND BECAUSE IT'S, IT IS ONE THAT WE'VE SEEN AGAIN AND AGAIN, THIS KIND OF THING TAKING PLACE. AND, UM, I WAS THE ONE WHO WAS ATTEMPTING TO TRY TO FIND A, A COMPROMISE, UM, WITH THE, WITH THE OWNER, WITH THE APPLICANT. UH, MAINLY JUST OUT COMPASSIONATE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE THINGS PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING RIGHT NOW AND, UH, TO TRY TO BE REASONABLE. UM, AND THE COMPROMISE I WAS PROPOSING, THOSE, THEY GO WITH WINDOWS THAT WOULD MEET THE GUIDELINES ON THE FRONT, ALL OF THE WINDOWS, NOT JUST THE, UH, THE FIXED ONES, BUT ALSO THE OTHER TWO THAT DO NOT COMPLY WITH THAT. THE APPLICANT AT THAT TIME DID NOT WANT TO GO WITH THAT COMPROMISE, AND THEY'VE COME BACK WITH SOMETHING THAT'S LESS THAN THAT COMPROMISE IN MY MIND. SO I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, YEAH, THAT'S HOW, THAT'S HOW I REMEMBER THAT. I, I DON'T THINK I WAS PREPARED TO SUPPORT THE COMPROMISE THAT THE APPLICANT WASN'T WILLING TO ACCEPT AT THAT TIME EITHER. AND I THINK I SUPPORTED DENIAL THEN, AND I'LL SUPPORT DENIAL AGAIN TODAY. IT IS ALSO THE QUESTION OF THE CONFIGURATION OF THE WINDOWS, THAT WINDOWS THAT ARE INSTALLED ARE NOT, UM, WHAT ARE SHOWN ON THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS. UM, I BELIEVE THE CHANGES TO DEFENDANT, MOST OF THE CHANGES TO THE FENESTRATION PATTERN WERE ADDRESSED IN THE, THE PREVIOUS, UH, H D C ITEM AND THOSE WERE APPROVED. EDWARD, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? I, I DON'T REMEMBER THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FRONT VERSUS SIZE. I KNOW WE APPROVED SIDE ONE VACATIONS, THE FENESTRATION PATTERN, THE UPDATED FENESTRATION PATTERN WAS APPROVED. THAT WAS PART OF ONE OF THEIR ITEMS THAT WAS A SEPARATE APPROVAL. UM, SPECIFICALLY THE WINDOWS THAT ARE INSTALLED WERE DENIED. THOSE ARE, THAT WAS THE ONLY ITEM THAT WAS DENIED IN THE PREVIOUS REQUEST. UH, JUST ASK I THAT THE, THE ONLY ITEM THAT THAT, UM, THAT, THAT I, I FIND TROUBLESOME IS THE CHANGE THAT OCCURS OUTSIDE OF THE, THE COMMITMENTS THAT ARE MADE. UM, BUT I, I DO WANNA MAKE CLEAR, YOU KNOW, KIND OF, YOU KNOW, MY, MY STANDALONE WINDOWS AND, AND THE, THE, THE ASSEMBLAGE AS A WHOLE HARDY BOARD, THE, THESE ARE MACHINES FOR LIVING AND THEY HAVE A PARTICULAR VOCABULARY. SO THERE'S, THERE'S ALSO, YOU KNOW, TO ME, THIS TENSION OF, OF FORCING, UH, VOCABULARY FROM A DIFFERENT STYLE OF BUILDING INTO, UH, TO FORCE IT TO TRY TO BE A BUILDING THAT IT'S NEVER GONNA BE. UH, WHEN I LOOK AT THE EAVES AND THE DETAILS OF THE EAVES AND THE WOOD, I, I THINK THAT THEY'RE MAKING AN EFFORT TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT MAY NOT EXIST. AND INSIDE OF THAT, I, I WOULD THINK THAT THERE IS A WINDOW THAT IS NOT THE TYPE OF [01:00:01] WINDOW THAT WE ONLY LIKE TO USE THAT IS APPROPRIATE. AND CASE IN IN POINT, THAT ONE BUILDER THAT THAT CAME IN, UH, ASKING FOR VINYL WINDOWS THAT, THAT WERE DENIED WHEN HE HAD JUST BUILT A BUILDING AND THAT WE APPROVED THE VINYL WINDOWS. AND IF YOU PUT THE TWO TOGETHER, YOU CAN SEE HOW THINGS ARE ACHIEVED. SO ON ITS FACE, I'M NOT, UH, UH, WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY OBJECT TO, UH, SEEING WHAT A COMPLETED PROJECT LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT STANDS AT TEST OF TIME. UH, BUT I, BUT, BUT I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM IS WHEN THE OWNER COMES IN AND, AND COMMITS TO SOMETHING AND THEN THE, THE BUILDER COMES IN AND COMMITS TO SOMETHING THAT, THAT CREATES, UH, THAT CREATES A, A, A PROBLEM. AND, UM, UH, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SHOWN WITHOUT SUPPORTIVE OR NOT. OKAY. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GIBBS. I SUPPORT, UM, COMMISSIONER FISHER'S MOTION FOR DENIAL. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE I MADE A MOTION, BUT I'LL DO SO NOW MOVE FOR DENIAL. COMMISSIONER. SECOND. UM, MR. COMMISSIONER GIBB, YOUR AUDIO'S A LITTLE LOW, SO I THINK YOU'LL PROBABLY BE REMAINING JUST BY SPEAKING A LITTLE LOUDER. OKAY. THIS COMMISSIONER GIBBS, I SECOND. THANK YOU. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS? AYE. QUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. UM, CARPENTER A AYE, UM, GROOVE HAS STEPPED AWAY. BOWMAN. AYE. FETZER AYE. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THIS IS A COMMENT FOR STAFF. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UM, JUST MAKE THE APPLICANT AWARE THAT IF THEY DON'T AGREE WITH THIS RULING, THAT THEY CAN APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THANK YOU. UM, [20-3490 Address/Description: 320 N HACKBERRY ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-191 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Johnrudy Balderrama/JRM CONSTRUCTION LLC Request: Window and siding replacement City Council Dist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ddress/Description: 311 CEDAR ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-232 Historic District Name: King William Applicant: Robert Alvarado/South Antonio Builders Request: Exterior alterations, porch modifications, construction of a rear addition City Council Dist.: 1] UM, IT'S GONNA BE STEPHANIE. ALL RIGHT. STEPH, ARE YOU THERE? YES. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 20 H TWO C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 2 3 2 ADDRESS, THREE 11 CEDAR STREET. YEAH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ONE RELOCATE THE FRONT DOOR TO A CENTRAL LOCATION ON THE FRONT FACADE. TWO. INSTALL A HISTORIC FOOT WINDOW AT THE LOCATION OF THE RELOCATED FRONT DOOR. THREE. REPLACE THE FULL LIGHT SIDE DOOR WITH HISTORIC DOOR FEATURING A ONE THIRD LIGHT DESIGN OR RELOCATE [01:10:01] THE FRONT PORCH. COLUMNS A FEW INCHES TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEW DOOR AND WINDOW LOCATION. AND FIVE, CONSTRUCT A REAR ADDITION MEASURING APPROXIMATELY 200 SQUARE FEET. ITEM ONE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FRONT DOOR RELOCATION BASED ON BINDING. B. ITEM TWO. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WINDOW INSTALLATION BASED ON C. ITEM THREE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE SLIDE DOOR REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING D. ITEM FOUR. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PORCH MODIFICATIONS BASED ON FINDING E. AND ITEM FIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REAR EDITION BASED ON FINDING F WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE ALL MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS AND FINAL PERMIT LEVEL DRAWINGS TO STAFFER REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. AND TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL WOOD WOOD WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS THAT MEET STAFF STIPULATIONS AS LISTED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS. I WILL NOTE THAT SINCE POSTING THE APPLICANT HAS WITHDRAWN ITEMS NUMBER ONE, TWO, AND FOUR, THOSE ARE THE ITEMS THAT STAFF WAS NOT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THAT, UM, PERTAIN TO THE RELOCATION AND MODIFICATION OF, UH, PORCH ELEMENTS AND THE FRONT FACADE. HOWEVER, THE, THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE THE COMMISSION TO TAKE ACTION ON ITEMS NUMBER THREE AND FIVE, WHICH STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF WITH STIPULATIONS, AND THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO THOSE STIPULATIONS. HOWEVER, I DO HAVE THE APPLICANT, ROBERT AND THE OWNER KATE ON THE LINE IN CASE THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I'VE HAD A, A GOOD BIT OF TIME TO GO OVER THIS CASE. I AGREE WITH STAFF'S FINDINGS AND, AND I WOULD JUST, UH, POINT OUT THAT KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION, UH, ALSO SUPPORTED STAFF'S FINDINGS AND SUPPORT FOR APPROVAL ON ITEMS THREE AND FIVE WITH STIPULATION. SO I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS THREE AND FIVE WITH STIPULATIONS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I SECOND THAT MOTION. IT SAYS CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS THREE AND FIVE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? I DOES. AYE. YES. AYE. GIBBS AYE. QUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE UH, CARPENTER AYE GROUP HAS LEFT WELLMAN. AYE BET SIR. AYE. AND NOTHING, AYE. MOTION CARRIES. [20-3484 Address/Description: 514 N PINE ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-228 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: RETERSDORF AARON Request: Amendment to a previously approved fence design, front yard trellis structure installation City Council Dist.: 2] OKAY, EDWARD, YOU'VE GOT NUMBER 21. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 21 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 28 5 14 NORTH POND. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, INSTALL A FRONT YARD CATTLE PANEL FENCE TO FEATURE FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT AND A BLACKROCK LANDSCAPING DETAIL TO BE BENEATH THE FENCE. TWO, TO CONSTRUCT A FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING TRAILER STRUCTURE TO FEATURE EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT AND EIGHT FEET IN WIDTH. PROPOSED TRAILER WILL FEATURE FEATURE STEEL CONSTRUCTION AND WILL BE DETACHED FROM THE PROPOSED FRONT YARD FENCE. ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED TRAILER STRUCTURE WILL FEATURE LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE INSTALLATION OF A FRONT YARD FENCE WITH A STIPULATION THAT IF A GRAVEL ELEMENT IS INSTALLED, THAT IT FEATURE NATIVE COLORS AND NOT BLACK AS PROPOSED AS NOTED IN FINDING THEME. AND TWO, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO, THE INSTALLATION OF OUR FRONT YARD TRAILER STRUCTURE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IT DOES NOT EXCEED FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT AS NOTED IN FINDING D I HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE. HI COMMISSIONERS. AFTERNOON, THIS IS AARON BURG FROM THE APPLICANT AT FIVE 14 NORTH PINE. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, YES WE CAN. OKAY. UM, I CAN JUMP RIGHT INTO IT. SO FOR, UM, REQUEST NUMBER ONE, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M GRATEFUL THAT THE, THAT THE STAFF WAS ABLE TO, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE ACTUAL FENCE ITSELF. UM, THE STIPULATION ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING ROCK BEING, UH, NOT A NATIVE COLOR, I THINK THAT WAS A, A BIT GENERIC IN MY, IN MY REQUEST, JUST LABELING IT AS BLACK ROCK. UH, SPECIFICALLY WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR IS, UM, IT'S A STONE REFERRED TO AS TEXAS BLACK STAR GRAVEL. IT IS, UM, A VERY COMMONLY USED LANDSCAPING ROCK. YOU KNOW, A BREWERY HAS IT, A BUNCH OF HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE IT. UM, IT IS QUARRIED OVER IN NEW VALLEY COUNTY AND IT'S AN HOUR AWAY FROM SAN ANTONIO. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THEREFORE I THINK IT IS A, A NATIVE, UM, ROCK TECHNICALLY. UM, ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S LONG BEEN USED BY THE RAILROAD. YOU DRIVE OVER THE RAILROAD TRACK, YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS IS THE STONE THAT'S USED, UM, BETWEEN ALL THE, ALL THE TRACKS AND, AND, YOU KNOW, GIVEN DIGNITY HILLS HISTORY OF THE RAILROAD, I THOUGHT THIS WAS A, AN APPROPRIATE [01:15:01] USE. UM, AGAIN, THIS, THIS IS NOT A WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF A, OF THE SUN YARD WITH THE STONE. IT'S REALLY A SMALL FUNCTIONAL RIBBON OF THE STONE TO GO ALONG THE BASE OF THE FENCE TO ASSIST WITH, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY, PROPERTY MAINTENANCE. WE, WE LACKING AROUND THE, THE BASE OF THE FENCE, NOT, NOT DAMAGING THE POST, UH, WHILE DOING SO, AND EVENTUALLY WE'LL, WE'LL LIKELY BE OBSCURED BY, UM, THOSE SORT OF LANDSCAPING IN, IN THE FUTURE. UM, SO I'D LIKE TO REQUEST THE APPROVAL FOR, FOR THAT SPECIFIC STONE, UM, FOR REQUEST NUMBER TWO REGARDING THE TRELLIS. UM, SO IF YOU CAN GO TO P D F PAGE 16. UM, FROM THE, FROM THE, UH, THE PACKAGE THERE, YOU CAN SEE THERE, THAT'S THE, THE VIEW, UH, VIEW OF THE CURRENT SPACE BETWEEN MY FRONT PORCH ON THE LEFT SIDE AND THE NEIGHBOR'S FRONT PORCH TO THE SOUTH OF ME ON THE RIGHT. UM, WALL TO WALL. THE HOUSES ARE ABOUT 10 FEET OF APART, SO WE'RE RIGHT ON TOP OF EACH OTHER FROM THE ROOF LINES ARE ABOUT ONLY FOUR, FOUR TO FIVE FEET APART. UM, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, AND THE MAIN OBJECTIVE IS JUST TO CREATE SOME SORT OF PRIVACY SCREEN. UH, THE FRONT PORCH IS RIGHT THERE AND OUT THERE ALL THE TIME. AND ALSO I HAVE WINDOWS IN MY LIVING ROOM THAT ARE JUST OFF THE PORCH AND, AND, UH, OFTENTIMES IT FEELS LIKE THESE HOUSES ARE ALMOST CONJOINED. AND, UM, THE VIEW OF THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, UH, HAS ACTUALLY WORSENED SINCE THE PICTURE WAS TAKEN. THAT FIRST WINDOW, UH, WITH A BURG OF BARS IS ACTUALLY SHATTERED, UH, OUTWARD. NOW THE WINDOW AC UNIT THERE, UH, IS NOW FRAME BY A, UH, HUBBY'S DIAPER BOX. AND YOU KNOW, THE HOUSE OBVIOUSLY IS RIFE WITH CODE, UH, VIOLATION, LACK OF PAINT. THE ROOF IS CAVING IN, THERE'S HANGING FLASHING. UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES. AN ABSENTEE LANDLORD THAT HASN'T BEEN TAKEN CARE OF HIS PROPERTY. SO WHAT I'M PROPOSING HERE IS, IS REALLY MORE OF JUST A, OF A LANDSCAPING SUPPORT STRUCTURE FOR, FOR THREE JASMINE PLANTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE GROUND. I PUT THOSE IN THE GROUND ABOUT 18 MONTHS AGO, UM, TRYING TO BE COGNIZANT OF, OF THE GUIDELINES AND, AND KEEPING IT IT TRANSPARENT. I WANTED TO GET THE PLANT A HEAD START. SO, UM, WHAT YOU'LL WILL EVENTUALLY BE HERE IS, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEXT, THE NEXT SLIDE IN 17, A VERY ROUGH APPROXIMATION, UM, OF, OF WHAT IT'LL LOOK LIKE. IT'S, YOU KNOW, THREE STEEL KEY POSTS THAT'LL BE ERECTED IN THE GROUND, JUST HAMMERED IN NO CONCRETE, UH, PERMANENT STRUCTURE. UM, AND THE JASMINE WILL GROW UP ON IT AND FILL IT OUT RATHER QUICKLY. YOU KNOW, IT'S ALL IRRIGATED AND, AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THE PLANS. HAVE A GOOD HEAD START HERE. SO, UH, IF YOU SCROLL DOWN TO I BELIEVE SLIDE 20, UM, THERE'S KIND OF SIDE BY SIDE AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST REALISTIC, UH, REPRESENTATION OF WHAT IT'LL EVENTUALLY LOOK LIKE. UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT'S JUST AN EIGHT FOOT BY EIGHT FOOT SUPPORT STRUCTURE FOR THESE PLANTS. UM, THE SAME GOAL, I GUESS COULD HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED WITH, YOU KNOW, I COULD PLANT SOME RED TIPS THERE OR, OR BAMBOO OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT I THOUGHT THIS WAS MORE, A MORE APPROPRIATE DESIGN, UH, A LITTLE MORE FITTING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, HIGHER QUALITY, AND ALSO PROVIDES A, A, A SLEEKER PROFILE THAN SAY, SOME LARGE LANDSCAPING THAT MIGHT GROW TO THE SAME HEIGHT THAT MIGHT CREATE A CHOKE POINT IN THAT, IN THAT SIDE YARD. SO, UM, AGAIN, THE PROFILE OF THIS, OF THE STRUCTURAL FIT A HUNDRED PERCENT BEHIND THE FOOTPRINT OF BOTH OF OUR PRIMARY STRUCTURES, UH, MINIMALLY VISIBLE FROM THE ROADWAY DAY ONE UNTIL IT FILLS OUT WILL BE PRIMARILY TRANSPARENT. UH, AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S DETACHED A HUNDRED PERCENT FROM THE REAR POWER FENCE AND THE FRONT YARD FENCE THAT WE, UH, FOR PRICE. SO, UM, OPEN TO ANY COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION POINTS THAT YOU GUYS MAY HAVE. UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN. UM, SO MY INITIAL THOUGHTS ABOUT, UM, THIS STRUCTURE IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE SEE OFTEN, UM, THE WAY THAT IT'S BEING PROPOSED, BUT IT SEEMS THAT IT FITS A LOT OF OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR THE, UH, NOT THE, THE IMPERMANENT NATURE OF THE WAY THAT IT'S CONSTRUCTED. UM, AND GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE AND THE, UH, THE, YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES REQUIREMENT FOR SCREENING UTILITIES AND, UH, YOU KNOW, OTHER TYPES OF, UH, UTILITY TYPE, UH, EQUIPMENT, I THINK THAT THIS MAKES SENSE, UH, IN THE SHORT TERM. AND THEN IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, LATER ON WHEN THIS, THIS OTHER HOME IS IN BETTER CONDITION, IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, TAKEN DOWN OR REMOVED, TAKEN THE MINIMAL IMPACT TO THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE PROPERTY. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE CASES I I HAD TO THINK ABOUT FOR SEVERAL DAYS. UM, ORDINARILY [01:20:01] I'D SAY THE APPROPRIATE THING TO, I, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE PRIVACY ISSUE AND THE NUISANCE OF THE ADJACENT, UH, STRUCTURE ISSUE. SO I, I THINK, UH, THAT GOES A LONG, A LONG WAY IN THIS CONDITION. UM, I, I, I THINK THAT, UH, I WOULD, I WOULD RECOMMEND PUTTING A PLANT THERE THAT GROWS TO AN APPROPRIATE HEIGHT TO GIVE YOU THE, UH, THE SCREEN THAT YOU NEED TO, TO CREATE THE PRIVACY. UM, I THINK THE IMAGE THAT WE SEE ON THE SCREEN REALLY DEMONSTRATES THE TIGHTNESS OF THE EAVES AND, AND I'M NOT SURE THERE'S REALLY ADEQUATE WIDTH THERE, UH, TO BE ABLE TO, UH, ACCOMMODATE, UH, APPROPRIATE PLANTINGS, UH, TO ACHIEVE THAT. UM, I, I, I AM ANXIOUS TO HEAR FROM, UH, COMMISSIONER LFO ON, UH, SOME SUGGESTIONS. I THINK GENERALLY WHAT I SEE THIS AS IS A, JUST A SCAFFOLD FOR SOME PLANTS TO CREATE A PRIVACY SCREEN. AND I'M LEANING INTO SUPPORT, BUT I'M INTERESTED IN SOME OF THE OTHER THOUGHTS HERE BECAUSE STAFF IS INTERPRETING THIS AS A FENCE AND, UH, AN EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE SEGMENT AT THAT. THIS IS COMMISSIONER LUNE. UM, I REALLY DON'T, UH, FEEL THAT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED FOR THE SCREEN IS APPROPRIATE. I AGREE WITH STAFF. UH, I THINK IF THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING FOR PRIVACY, THEY MIGHT LOOK AT SOMETHING LIKE A ROLL DOWN SHADE THAT COULD BE RAISED OR LOWERED AS NECESSARY WHEN THE, THE OCCUPANTS ARE OUT ON THE PORCH THAT WOULD, UH, UH, ROLL DOWN SHADE WOULD SCREEN THE, UH, VIEW FROM THE ADJACENT HOUSE. ALSO THE, UH, GRAVEL BEING REQUESTED IN THE FRONT, THE BLACK GRAVEL, UH, THAT BLACK COLOR IS CONSISTENTLY REJECTED BY THIS COMMISSION. SO I AGREE WITH STAFF THAT, UH, IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO INSTALL THE GRAVEL AT THE BASE OF THE FENCE FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES, WHICH IS A GREAT IDEA, BUT IT SHOULD BE A, A NATURAL COLOR IN THE TAN RANGE. SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS FROM MY, UH, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AND, UM, WHILE I, I AGREE WITH THE, THE SENSE THAT MR. SORRY, THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN APPEALED TO KIND OF TEMPORARY NATURE OF THIS THING, I THINK ACTUALLY TEMPORARY TENDS TO BECOME KIND OF PERMANENT OVER TIME. AND SO I, I LIKED THAT I, SOME OF THOSE, UH, SUGGESTIONS ABOUT A ROLLER SHADE OR EVEN IF, IF THE TR ELEMENT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS CLOSER TO THE PORSCHE AND, UH, YOU KNOW, TIED IN WITH THE RAILING IN SOME WAY, BUT, BUT, UM, HAVING IT KIND OF STANDING OUT THERE, I THINK IT ACTUALLY DRAWS A LOT OF ATTENTION TO IT. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT IS, IT IS INTERESTING TO HEAR THE THOUGHTS OF THE APPLE, BIT ABOUT THE, THE GRAVEL, UH, PARTICULARLY THE RELATIONSHIP TO, UM, ITS USE WITH THE RAILROADS. BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, THAT'S NOT A TYPICAL MATERIAL IN A HISTORIC, UH, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I AM INTRIGUED BY HIS RATIONALE FOR THAT. I, I THINK, UH, AS, UH, COMMISSIONER LA SAID, I THINK IT, IT SHOULD GO MORE TOWARDS THE NATURAL BUFF COLORS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT YOU FIND HERE IN SAN ANTONIO NATIVELY, RATHER THAN SOMETHING THAT'S, UH, IMPORTED FROM, UH, EVEN IF IT'S JUST A FEW COUNTIES AWAY. I THINK IT'S, UH, STILL NOT SOMETHING THAT I COULD CONSIDER AS A LOCAL REGIONAL . THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER AND, UM, I CONCUR WITH WHAT, UM, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE MENTIONED, UH, A, A STRUCTURE HERE FOR TRELLIS. UM, I THINK THE PRIVACY COULD BE ACHIEVED WITH OTHER PLANTINGS AND NOT HAVING ANYTHING, UH, UH, STRUCTURAL THERE. UM, IT LOOKS TO BE, UM, ALL THE UNSIGHTLY PARTS ARE GENERALLY BELOW THE SIX FOOT HEIGHT OF THE, UH, THE BACKYARD FENCE. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF DROPPING THIS, UH, ELEMENT DOWN TO, TO MATCH THE, UH, EITHER THE HEIGHT OF THE RAILING ON THE PORCH OR THE HEIGHT OF THE, THE FENCE, WHICH IS A COUPLE INCHES HIGHER THAN THE RAILING, UM, MIGHT BE PALATABLE TO SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS, BUT I'M GENERALLY, UH, NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS PARTICULAR STRUCTURE. MR. CHAIRMAN, [01:25:01] UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS REGARDING THE GRAVEL AND DENIAL OF ITEM TWO. THANK IT. I BELIEVE THAT WAS COMMISSIONER LFO AS A SECOND. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? I DOES. AYE FISH, AYE GIBBS. AYE. WHO LOST HIS AYE AREOLA. AREOLA. YOU MIGHT'VE LOST HIM. I DON'T. OKAY. UH, CARPENTER AYE GROUP, IT IS ALSO LEFT US BOWMAN. AYE THAT SIR? AYE. ? AYE, UH, WITH EIGHT VOTES? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. . THE CASE LIST. OKAY, UM, [20-3486 Address/Description: 209 SADIE ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-217 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Chris Coker/Blue Line Housing, LLC. Request: Construction of a 1-story rear addition and front facade addition, exterior modifications, site modifications City Council Dist.: 1] SO ITEM 22 IS RACHEL. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NUMBER 22 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH TWO 17 ADDRESS 2 0 9 SADIE REQUEST. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE CONSTRUCT A 30 A 300 SQUARE FOOT REAR ADDITION. TWO, CONSTRUCT A 15 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION ON THE FRONT SIDE. THREE, REPLACE THE EXISTING FRONT DOOR. FOUR, INSTALL NEW CONCRETE FRONT STEPS AND PORCH RAILING. RECOMMENDATION ITEM ONE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REAR EDITION BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH H WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. ONE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR STAFF OR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THE WOOD WINDOW SPECIFICATION FOR STAFF OR REVIEW AND APPROVAL AND THAT THE WINDOWS MEET STAFF STANDARD WINDOW STIPULATIONS AS LISTED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS ITEM TWO. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FRONT EDITION BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH D. ITEM THREE, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FRONT DOOR REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDINGS J THROUGH K. ITEM FOUR STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF NEW CONCRETE FRONT STEPS AND RAILING BASED ON FINDING L WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION. ONE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL MATERIAL CERTIFICATIONS TO STAFF OR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, CHRIS COKER HERE WITH US. HEY, GOOD AFTERNOON, YOU. THANK YOU. AND BEFORE WE START, UM, JUST, UH, FOR THE RECORD, WANT TO ANNOUNCE THAT COMMISSIONERS, UM, OLA AND GROUP HAVE BOTH LEFT THE MEETING. UM, WE STILL HAVE EIGHT COMMISSIONERS, SO DEFINITELY A QUORUM, BUT JUST WANTED TO MAKE YOUR ALRIGHT. UM, SO, HI. SO, UM, YEAH, I GUESS, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST TO START OFF WITH I LOOKING AT THE HOUSE FROM THE FRONT, I, UM, IT HAS TWO DOORS ON IT CURRENTLY. IT'S NOT A DUPLEX. UM, IT IS A SINGLE FAMILY AND WE'RE KEEPING IT A SINGLE FAMILY. SO, UH, MY INTENTION HERE IS REALLY KIND OF FOR AESTHETICS. IF YOU HAVE A PICTURE AND CAN SEE THE FRONT PORCH, TYPICALLY WHEN YOU APPROACH A HOUSE, YOU WANT TO SEE THE FRONT DOOR DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF YOU. AND THAT'S REALLY OUR GOAL IN THIS IS BASICALLY TO MOVE, UH, THE DOOR THAT'S ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE AS YOU, UM, WALK UP THE STAIRS JUST OVER TO BE IN FRONT OF YOU AS YOU APPROACH FRONT, AS YOU APPROACH THE HOUSE. IT'S MORE WELCOMING, MORE INVITING TO ME AT LEAST. UM, AND THEN WHERE THE EXISTING DOOR IS TO THE LEFT, WE WOULD, UM, JUST ADD THE EXACT SAME TYPE OF WINDOW THAT WE HAVE, UH, CONSISTENTLY AROUND THE HOUSE. UH, WE HAVE EXHIBITED, I, YOU KNOW, I DO SEVERAL, UM, REMODELS IN HISTORIC DISTRICT. MY LAST ONE BEING, UH, OR THE LAST ONE THAT I'VE HAD YOU GUYS APPROVE SOMETHING FOR, WHICH WAS LAST MONTH WAS 10 22 NOLAN. AND IT HAD TWO, TWO DOORS IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. IT WAS A DUPLEX AND WE TURNED IT INTO A SINGLE FAMILY. UM, Y'ALL APPROVED THAT AND QUITE FRANKLY, ONE OF THE STAFF MEMBERS, UH, CAME OUT AND LOOKED AT IT AND SAID IT LOOKED AMAZING. THE, THE WINDOW THAT WE REPLACED THE DOOR WITH WAS ABSOLUTELY IDENTICAL TO THE WINDOW THAT WAS RIGHT NEXT TO IT. AND THEN WE WERE ALSO APPROVED FOR WINDOW TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE DOOR DOOR. SO BASICALLY THE SAME KIND OF SETUP THAT WE HAVE HERE, UM, [01:30:01] EXCEPT FLIPPED OPPOSITE. SO, UM, THEN THE OTHER PART IN QUESTION IS THERE'S, UH, I GUESS NOT JUST CALLING IT AN ADDITION. TECHNICALLY I GUESS IT WOULD BE, IT'S MORE OF A REARRANGEMENT IN MY EYES ON THE, WHEN YOU APPROACH THE FRONT PORCH TO THE RIGHT SIDE, UM, IS THE SECOND DOOR. AND SO WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO IS BASICALLY JUST PULL THAT, THAT WALL OUT WHERE THAT SECOND DOOR IS ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE AND MAKE IT FLUSH WITH THE WALL IN WHICH WE'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE THE, UH, THE MAIN ENTRANCE ON. ALSO, WE WOULD, UH, WE WOULD PUT LIKE KIND WINDOWS ON THAT AREA AS WELL. SO WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE PLENTY OF PORCH AREA THERE WE'RE, THE PORCH IS GONNA LOOK FANTASTIC, UM, USING ALL THE APPROPRIATE MATERIALS TO HELP APPROVED FOR US ON THE PATH. UM, AND, AND, UM, ALSO BY BRINGING THAT RIGHT HAND SIDE OUT, IT, IT KIND OF MAKES THE, THE, ON THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE AND THAT AREA, IT'S A LIVING SPACE, SO IT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT MORE SYMMETRICAL AND WE THINK INVITING AND COMFORTABLE TO, TO, UH, EITHER US IF WE'RE GONNA KEEP IT OR THE NEXT FAMILY THAT'S GONNA PURCHASE THAT HOUSE. UM, SO THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY THINKING. I THINK I COVERED THE THINGS THAT, UH, STAFF WERE RECOMMENDED NOT APPROVING. UH, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS FROM YOU GUYS IF YOU MAY HAVE THEM. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, YOU MENTIONED, UH, YOU MENTIONED, I, I THINK I RECALL THE CASE YOU MENTIONED WHERE THERE WERE SOME ADJUSTMENTS, A LOT OF FRONT PORCH, AND I THINK THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE VERY SPECIFIC TO THAT CASE. UH, I THINK I UNDERSTAND CLEARLY WHAT YOU'RE INTENDING TO DO HERE AND WHY YOU'RE IN INTENDING TO DO IT. UM, BUT I THINK THIS CURRENT PORCH IS A, A UNIQUE IN CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURE AND I DON'T SUPPORT CLOSING IT IN. UM, AND NO, WE WOULDN'T, WE WOULDN'T CLOSE IT IN, NOT AT ALL. WELL, IT WOULD NO, A WRAP AROUND PORCH. SO YOU'RE CLOSING IN A WRAP. OKAY. OR THE PORCH. OKAY. JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR. WE'RE NOT CLOSING IN THE FULL PORCH, IT'S JUST THAT THE RIGHT HAND PORTION, WHICH WOULD, I GUESS AS YOU SAID WOULD, UH, WOULD MAKE IT A REGULAR PORCH INSTEAD OF A WRAPAROUND PORCH. RIGHT, RIGHT. UM, OKAY. I I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR, YOUR, YOUR POINT ABOUT THE FRONT DOOR, UH, BEING SHIFTED AND IF YOU COULD PUT THE PLAN ON THE SCREEN THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE FRONT PORCH WHERE THE FRONT DOOR IS, UH, YOU PUT THE CURSOR ON, WE HAVE IT WHERE THE, WHERE, WHERE ARE THE TWO DOORS PRESENTLY ON THIS? ARE YOU ASKING ME? I'M ASKING YOU OR STAFF, BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT IN CONTROL OF THE CURSOR, MAYBE STAFF IS BETTER EQUIPPED. YEP. OKAY. SO I SEE THE, THE HAND ON THAT, ON THAT LOWER RECESS PA SPACE, AND THAT SEEMS LIKE AN, AN APPROPRIATE POSITION OF, UH, OF A PRIMARY AND SECONDARY FRONT ENTRANCE FOR A PORCH LIKE THIS. SO, UM, I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, BUT I, I, I SUPPORT, UH, STAFF'S POSITION ON THIS AND I THINK CLOSING THE CORNER OF THAT PORCH DRAMATICALLY CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THIS HOUSE. SO I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS A SIMILAR CONDITION TO THE, THE CASE YOU PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED. UH, BUT I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUALITY OF WORK NECESSARILY, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WANNA DO HERE. UH, I'LL GET SOME THOUGHTS FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I, I, UH, AGREE WITH STAFF AND, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH, UH, ON THIS. I THINK IN THE PAST WE'VE, UH, WE'VE ENTERTAINED, UH, THE IDEA OF, UH, RELOCATING DOORS, UH, OR INTRODUCING NEW DOORS AND FIXING EXISTING DOORS, UH, THAT IS MAKING 'EM SO THAT THEY, UH, ARE VISIBLE FROM THE OUTSIDE, BUT THEN SHEET ROCKED OVER ON THE INSIDE TO ALLOW MINIMAL THE FRONT BEDROOM, UH, TO BE CARVED OUT OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY A, AN ENTRY, UH, OR A, A LIVING AREA. BUT, UH, THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE THE, THE MOTIVATION HERE. UM, AND WHILE IT SEEMS PECULIAR TO HAVE A PORCH WITH THE, THE FRONT DOOR, THE PRIMARY FRONT DOOR, NOT READILY VISIBLE FROM THE FRONT, THAT IS KIND OF PART OF THE QUIRKY CHARACTER OF, OF THIS SORT OF, UH, SEMI WRAPAROUND GOR. AND, UM, SO I, I, I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE STORY TO BE TOLD HERE AND I CAN'T LOSE THAT PART OF THE STORY. SO I, I SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I, I HEARING NO OTHER IMMEDIATE COMMENTS. I, I WOULD MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE IN FOUR WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND DENIAL OF ITEMS TWO AND THREE. UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ. I SAID AGAIN, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. MS. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH [01:35:03] GIBBS AYE. QUEZ AYE. AREOLA HAS LEFT CARPENTER. AYE RU HAS LEFT BOWMAN. AYE THAT AYE? NO. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. NEXT IS ITEM 23. [20-3489 Address/Description: 420 DEVINE ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-192 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: UJU ENTERPRISES LLC Request: Exterior alterations, roof replacement, porch modification, site elements City Council Dist.: 1] UM, WE NEED FREE FOR THAT. SO RACHEL, I COULD ITEM NUMBER 23, CASE NUMBER 20 21 92 FOR FOUR 20 DIVINE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL. TWO. ONE, REPLACE THE STANDING SEA METAL ROOF FOR THE COMPOSITION SHINGLE LOOP. TWO. MODIFY THE FRONT STONE SKIRTING AND COLUMN BASIS TO FEATURE STUCCO AND THREE, TO REMOVE UP TO FOUR WINDOW OPENINGS IN THE REAR OF THE SIDE ELEVATIONS. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE TO THREE BASED ON THE FINDINGS. THE APPLICANT MAY WORK WITH STAFF TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE BY INCLUDING ONE, RESTORING THE ROOFING MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE TO SPECIFICATIONS FOR METAL ROOFS. TWO, RESTORING THE PORCH AND FOUNDATION SKIRTING BASED ON PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OR AN APPROPRIATE CRAFTSMAN STYLE FEATURE. AND THREE, RESTORING THE REAR WINDOW OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE TO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WOOD RENEWAL. REPLACEMENT CASE COMMENT ON SITE VISIT CONDUCTED ON APRIL 2ND, 2020, STAFF FOUND THAT THE PROPERTY AT FOUR 20 DIVINE WAS SUBJECT TO WORK WITHOUT APPROVAL, INCLUDING WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF NATURAL LAWN WITH DECOMPOSED GRANITE REPLACEMENT OF BRIGHT IRON RAILING WITH GENERIC WOOD RAILING, REPLACEMENT OF NON-CONFORMING SHUTTERS COLUMN REMOVAL, GABLE GRILL REMOVAL, CHANGE IN ROOFING MATERIAL AND STUCCO APPLICATION TO SKIRTING AND COLUMN BASE AND REAR WINDOW REMOVAL. THE APPLICANT HAS COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH STAFF TO CORRECT ITEMS A THROUGH E WHILE ITEMS F THROUGH I AS PROPOSED MUST BE HEARD AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE H D R C HEARING, WHICH IS THE, UH, THREE REQUEST ITEMS THAT WE HAVE TODAY. I HAVE THE REALTOR REGGIE, UH, REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE LINE AT THIS TIME. UM, HELLO. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENT, JULIET JI, YOU STARTED OFF THIS MEETING BY READING A COMMENT FROM MS. , WHICH HIGHLIGHTED THE NEED TO PRESERVE OUR PAST. YOU ALSO READ ANOTHER COMMENT ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR COMMITTEE AND COMBATING SOMETIMES HIGH LEVEL OF DISRESPECT WITH REGARDS TO MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT. THOSE TWO REASONS ARE EXACTLY WHY MY CLIENT REQUESTED THIS HEARING. WHEN SHE BEGAN THIS PROCESS OF REHABBING HER HOME, SHE TRIED TO MIRROR THE HOME THAT HAD JUST PULLED ACROSS THE STREET FROM HER 4 3 7 DIVINE STREET, EVEN TO THE POINT OF REMOVING THE COLUMNS, WHICH SHE WILL GLADLY RETURN TO THEIR RIFLE FOX. HOWEVER, ON THE NO TO HER, IT WASN'T A NEW ROOF ON 4 3 7 DIVINE STREET, THAT ROOF WAS GRANDFATHERED IN. NOW WE WALKED DIVINE STREET FRONT AND BACK AND CERTAINLY WOULD INVITE YOU TO DO THE SAME. AND OUT THE 71 HOMES, 36 HAD A METAL ROOF AND 35 HAD A SHINGLE ROOF. SO THIS ONE YEAR SHINGLE ROOF IS DEFINITELY NOT AN, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T TAKE AWAY FROM THE LOOKING CHARACTER OF THAT STREET OF THAT DISTRICT. 50% OF THE GRANDFATHER ROOF ACTUALLY MATCHED HERS, WHICH SEEMED TO BE EXACTLY AGAIN, WHAT MS. CANTU WAS SPEAKING TO WITH PRESERVING OUR PAST. WITH THAT SAID, SHE IS A LONGTIME CITIZEN AND NOT CHALLENGING THE FINDINGS, BUT THIS WOULD BE A MAJOR FINANCIAL HARDSHIP AND SHE IS HOPING TO APPEAL TO A SENSE OF REASONING TO THIS SITUATION IN WHICH CLEARLY NO MALICIOUS INTENT WAS INVOLVED. UM, SHE APPRECIATES THE OPPORTUNITY TO AIR HER SIDE OF THE STORY, AND I WELCOME ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THE OTHER TWO ITEMS AS WELL. THANK YOU. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER AND, UM, I THINK STAFF HAS THIS RIGHT FOR, UM, ALL THE ITEMS. UM, ONE OF THE, THE, WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THIS HOUSE IS THAT THE PORCH SKIRTING AND THE THE COLUMN BASES LOOK TO BE A, UH, CAST CONCRETE BLOCK WITH A STONE TEXTURE, WHICH, UH, IS PROBABLY [01:40:01] A, UH, IF NOT UNIQUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AT LEAST NOT VERY COMMON TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT, UH, I THINK IT'S, UH, UNFORTUNATE LOSS TO THE, TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. YES, SIR. UM, I KNOW WITH THE SKIRTING, I DIDN'T KNOW IF I WAS ALLOWED TO RESPOND TO THAT, BUT UM, I KNOW WITH THE SKIRTING CHAIRMAN, UH, OR COMMISSIONER, IT WAS ALREADY DAMAGED UPON THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY. UH, THERE WERE SEVERAL BROKEN PIECES, UH, WHEN SHE BOUGHT IT. SO SHE, SHE HAD TAKEN OFF THE SKIRT AND ACTUALLY REPLACED IT WITH STUCCO. BUT I DEFINITELY CAN SEE YOUR POINT. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH, UM, NINA ON THE, ON THE SKIRTING, UH, THE WINDOW OPENINGS, THE COLUMN, THE COLUMN THAT'S IN THE ROOF, THEY'RE ALL KIND OF, UH, TANGLED IN THE SAME ISSUE. UH, THE GUIDELINES DIRECT US TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC MATERIAL, UH, TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE WHEN SOMETHING IS DAMAGED OR BEYOND REPAIR, MEANING IT HAS TO BE REPLACED, IT'S TO BE REPLACED IN KIND. THIS IS THE ISSUE WITH THE ROOF. NOT ALL OF THE STRUCTURES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE METAL ROOFS, SO THOSE THAT ARE IN SHINGLE, UH, MAY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IN SHINGLE. UH, WHAT'S SIGNIFICANT HERE IS THIS ONE HAS HAD A METAL ROOF, AND IF THAT METAL ROOF COULDN'T HAVE BEEN REPAIRED, WE WOULD'VE, UH, ALLOWED THAT ROOF REPLACEMENT IN KIND IN THE SAME MATERIAL. SO THAT'S ALSO KIND OF WHAT WE SEE ON THESE COLUMN ELEMENTS IN THE BASE. AND, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES, UH, HERE THAT WERE LOST. AND I THINK SOME OF IT'S REVERSIBLE, BUT I, I CONCUR WITH STAFF AND I, I WOULD MOVE FOR, IF THAT WAS A MOTION FOR DENIAL, I, UH, SECOND IT. MRS. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I WAS ATTEMPTING TO MAKE THAT MOTION. THANKS. THIS IS, UH, UH, DOES THE MOTION INCLUDE RESTORATION OF THE FRONT YARD TO NATURAL TURF? THE, THE, UH, COMM COMMISSIONER LOFO, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, THOSE ITEMS ARE NOT IN THEIR REQUESTS AND ARE NOT ON THIS, UH, AGENDA, BUT, UH, JUST TO ADD TO THAT, ALL OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE DONE THAT NEED TO BE CORRECTED WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE FUTURE. IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT, I GUESS THAT, I GUESS THAT SHOULD BE A QUESTION TO STAFF. YES, THAT IS CORRECT. THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY AGREED TO FIX, UH, A MAJORITY OF THE ITEMS, AND THE THREE YOU HERE TODAY ARE THE ONES THAT THEY CANNOT COMMIT TO WITHOUT, UH, AT LEAST TRYING FOR PROCESS. I, I, I UNDERSTAND. SO WE, WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE THREE ITEMS THAT WERE LISTED AND OKAY. AND WE HAVE, THANK YOU. UM, MR. COMMISSIONER, IF I MAY, UM, I DEFINITELY WANTED TO SPEAK TO THE, UH, FOUR WINDOW OPENINGS AS WELL. UM, THOSE AREAS ARE ACTUALLY, SHE ACTUALLY TURNED THOSE, OR, UM, THE, EXCUSE ME, THE LAYOUT OF THE HOME, UH, CHANGED. AND SO NOW WHERE THERE IS, UH, WHERE THOSE WINDOWS WERE NOW A KITCHEN, UM, WITH A, UM, WITH A STOVE AND, UM, REFRIGERATOR IN FRONT OF IT AS WELL. SO THAT WAS THE REASON WHY SHE WAS HOME, OBVIOUSLY ASKING FOR RELIEF ON THAT PART BECAUSE THEY TOLD, THEY CHANGED THE LAYOUT. NOW THAT'S THE KITCHEN AREA WHERE THOSE WINDOWS WERE. CAN I ASK STAFF TO PUT THOSE WINDOWS UP ON THE SCREEN FOR ITEMS FOR ITEM THREE AND WHO, DO YOU KNOW WHICH SLIDE THOSE ARE ON AND, AND WHY? THIS SHOULD BE ON THE EARLIER GOOGLE STREET VIEWS. UM, ESSENTIALLY IT'S THE REAR MOST SIDE WINDOWS ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE, I C TWO WINDOW OPENINGS HAVE BEEN REMOVED. UH, ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, UH, THEY WERE REMOVED PRIOR TO THEIR PURCHASE, BUT, UH, FIRST STAFF FINDINGS ON A, UH, MARCH, 2019 GOOGLE STREET VIEW, WE SEE THAT THE WINDOWS WERE STILL THERE, WHICH IS WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ENFORCEMENT. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THE REALTOR OR THE APPLICANT HAD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT THEY WERE REMOVED MUCH LONGER OR MUCH, UH, MUCH LONGER BEFORE THAT. WE, UH, ACTUALLY, I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE INFORMATION REGARDING THAT PIECE OF IT. UHUH, I DON'T, AND I CAN ADDRESS, I, I'M, I CAN ACKNOWLEDGE ITEM THREE TO THE APPLICANT. UH, WHEN THESE WINDOWS, PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY'RE ON THE SIDE OR FRONT ELEVATION, THEY'RE VISIBLE FROM DISCRE, ARE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THEY BE PRESERVED IN PLACE. WE UNDERSTAND THAT CHANGES ON THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE NEED TO OCCUR AND THINGS LIKE STOVE AND REFRIGERATORS NEED TO, UH, FIND PLACES THAT WHERE THEY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY. UH, AND WE USUALLY RECOMMEND THAT THAT, THAT [01:45:01] BE FUR OVER A ENCLOSED ON THE INSIDE, BUT THE, THE HISTORIC WINDOW, THE OPENING AND, UH, THE GENERAL FENESTRATION PATTERN BE MAINTAINED SO THAT IT COULD BE REVERSED AND UTILIZED IN THE FUTURE. AND I, I, I, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE PREDICAMENT HERE, BUT I STILL CONCUR WITH STAFF. THIS IS CHAIRMAN SIR. UH, POSSIBLY OFFERING, OFFERING AN AMENDMENT THAT IF THE, UH, APPLICANT CAN SHOW EVIDENCE THAT THESE WINDOWS HAD BEEN REMOVED PRIOR TO, UH, HER OWNERSHIP, THAT UH, SHE DOES NOT HAVE TO PUT THEM BACK. COMMISSIONER FISH, I THINK THAT WAS, IT WAS YOUR MOTION. WOULD YOU ACCEPT? YEAH, I, I, I WOULD ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT. UH, IS THAT AN ENFORCEABLE AMENDMENT AS A QUESTION TO STAFF? IS THAT WORKABLE? I WAS KIND OF SPEECHLESS. I, I THINK SO. I MEAN, IT'S JUST HARD TO VERIFY. WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION. WE KNOW IT HAPPENED, SO IT'S REALLY JUST THE WORK TOGETHER. ALRIGHT, WELL, I, I'LL ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS AND I'LL LET STAFF SORT IT OUT. IF, UH, UH, THE COMMISSIONER SECONDED ALSO ACCEPTS, I ACCEPT THAT THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, THIS IS, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? HERNANDEZ , THAT WAS AN AYE. YES. AYE FISH. AYE. GIBBS AYE. QUEZ AYE. AREOLA HAS LEFT CARPENTER. AYE. RUTH HAS NOT REJOINED US YET, BUT SHE IS COMING BACK, ROMAN. AYE THAT AYE. LA AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. [20-3474 Address/Description: 7519 OLD CORPUS CHRISTI RD HDRC Case No.: 2020-225 RIO District: RIO-6 Applicant: ZABRINA SILVA/COMET SIGNS LLC Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 3] ITEM 24, EDWARD. AGENDA, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 24 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 THROUGH 25 75 19 OLD CORPUS CHRISTI ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL SIGNAGE AT 75 19 OLD CORPUS CHRISTI ROAD TO INCLUDE ONE SET OF INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS THAT ARE TO READ SELF STORAGE. THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE WILL FEATURE APPROXIMATELY 58 SQUARE FEET INSIDE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH C. I HAVE THE APPLICANT NOT ALIVE. HI, THIS IS PATRICK SPENCER WITH ARCHITECTURE. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. GREAT. UM, I'VE GOT TWO MAIN POINTS THAT I'D LIKE TO COVER TODAY FOR THIS, UM, SIGNAGE REQUEST. UM, THE FIRST BEING THAT THERE'S A MINIMIZED VISIBILITY FROM SOUTHEAST MILITARY OF OUR BUILDING AND SIGNAGE DUE TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. UH, CURRENTLY WE HAVE THREE SIGNS LOCATED ON THE BUILDING THAT WERE APPROVED AT THE LAST H C R C HEARING. UH, TWO OF THEM ARE LOCATED AT THE OFFICE AND ONE OF THEM IS LOCATED AT THE NORTH FACE BUILDING ADJACENT SOUTHEAST MILITARY. THESE GOT, THESE SIGNS ARE SHOWN ON PAGE 13 THROUGH 16 IN THE . THE DISTANCE OF THE OFFICE FROM SOUTHEAST MILITARY, UH, IS OVER 300 FEET WITH BUILDINGS AND LANDSCAPING IN THE WAY THE VISIBILITY, UM, DURING DESIGN, WE WEREN'T AWARE THERE WAS GOING TO BE A, UH, GETTING CONSTRUCTED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF OLD CORPUS CHRISTI, UM, OUTSIDE OF THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT. UM, AND THAT PROJECT IS, UH, LOWERING OUR VISIBILITY, UM, FINDING THAT APPROVED THAT LOCATED AT THE OFFICE WAS INTENDED TO BE VISIBLE. SO WESTBOUND TRAFFIC ON SOUTHEAST MILITARY, BUT IS NOW ONLY VISIBLE TRAFFIC ON BOTH CORPUS CHRISTI. UM, YOU TAKE A LOOK AT PAGE 12, NEAR PACKET, THERE'S A SITE PLAN. UM, THE BUILDING IS NOT PARALLEL, THE SOUTHEAST MILITARY. UM, AS SUCH THAT SIGNAGE ON THE NORTH FACE, THE BUILDING HAS HIGHER VISIBILITY FOR EASTBOUND TRAFFIC, BUT IS PRETTY LIMITED FOR WESTBOUND TRAFFIC ALONG THE SOUTHEAST MILITARY. UM, THE, THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE ON PAGE NINE, HIS NEXT LIST, UM, AVAILABILITY STUDY ON PAGE SEVEN, THE LOCATION, UH, AS SHOWN ON PAGE 10, THAT'S ILLUSTRATIVE. THE SECOND POINT THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS THE RELATION OF SIGNAGE SIZE. SO [01:50:01] BUILDING SIZE. UM, IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE U D C WANTS TO MINIMIZE SIGN DENSITY ON THE BUILDING AND THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICTS. UM, OUR BUILDING IS THREE STORIES TALL. IT'S A GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 103 3000 SQUARE FEET. THE BUILDING IS 37 FEET HIGH AT THE LOCATION IN QUESTION IS THERE'S GONNA BE A BIG BUILDING IN THE AREA FOR SOME TIME. UM, IT OUR OPINION THAT THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING AND REQUESTING SIGNAGE WON'T CREATE AN OVERWHELMING IMAGE. IT'S NOT GONNA BE TACKED WITH SIGNS. UM, ADJACENT RETAIL CENTERS THAT ARE LOCATED IN RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICTS HAVE MULTIPLE SIGNS FROM MULTIPLE TENANTS, EVEN WITH THE REQUESTED SIGN DENSITY AND NEARBY RETAIL CENTERS. UM, I COMMISSIONERS FOR ANY QUESTIONS WE MAY HAVE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, SO THIS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, UH, 235 SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE AND WITH THIS, IT'S GONNA TAKE IT TO REALLY CLOSE TO 300 SQUARE FEET. IS THAT ACCURATE? CORRECT. OKAY. UM, THE, THE SIGNAGE THAT WE PREVIOUSLY, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THAT IS OBSTRUCTED, UH, COULD YOU DIRECT US TO THE SLIDE THAT'S SHOWING, UM, THE, THE VISI VISIBILITY PROBLEMS WITH PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SIGNAGE? YES. THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SIGNAGE STARTS ON PAGE 13 AND, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST PAGE IN THE PACKET, UH, PAGE 16, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A CUBE SMART CELL STORAGE SIGN AND AN OFFICE SIGN LOCATED AT THE OFFICE, UH, THAT IS LOCATED, UH, ON, UH, THE SECOND IMAGE ON PAGE 16 SHOWS ANOTHER Q SMART CELL STORAGE SIGN. THIS IS THE NORTH FACING, UH, WALL OF THE BUILDING FACING NORTH, UH, SOUTHEAST MILITARY. THE, UH, TWO SIGNS LOCATED IN THE OFFICE ARE THE ONES THAT, UH, WILL NOT ONLY BE VISIBLE TO, UH, OLD CORPUS CHRISTI. UM, THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STREET IS THE ONE THAT WILL BE BLOCKING, UH, VISIBILITY TO THESE SIGNS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UH, I THINK I, I THINK, UH, I TEND TO AGREE WITH THE, A APPLICANT ON THIS, UH, ON THIS CASE. THIS IS KIND OF IN, IN A, A SLIGHTLY STRANGE POSITION. IT'S A VERY LARGE BUILDING. THE, THE LOCATION THAT THIS SIGN IS BEING PROPOSED, UH, SEEMS TO BE APPROPRIATE. UH, AND IT SEEMS TO BE AN APPROPRIATE SCALE. UH, I DO THINK THAT THE TOTAL SIGNAGE PACKAGE IS QUITE LARGE. UH, BUT I'M, I'M COMFORTABLE SUPPORTING THIS AS SUBMITTED. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. UM, I WAS ACTUALLY JUST GONNA SAY SOMETHING, UH, IN THE LINES OF WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER PIERCE SAID, AND I THINK ALSO THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING. I MEAN, IN WHICH AREA IT IS NEXT TO THE, YOU KNOW, BUSY COMMERCIAL ROAD. YOU KNOW, IT'S, I I WOULD AGREE. I, UM, I MOVE. MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FE. I SECOND. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. UM, AND A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELASQUEZ. AYE. CARPENTER AYE GROUP? AYE. AYE. BOWMAN? AYE THAT SIR? AYE LA AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK [01:55:01] YOU. [20-3488 Address/Description: 125 W GRAMERCY PLACE HDRC Case No.: 2020-205 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: HICKS DALE & THERESA ERIN Request: Exterior modifications to rear accessory structure City Council Dist.: 1] WE HAVE STEPHANIE ON THE LINE? YES. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER 25 H C R P, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 2 0 5 ADDRESS, 1 25 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO MODIFY THE EXISTING FRONT FENESTRATION OF THE REAR GARAGE TO INCLUDE THREE SINGLE BAY GARAGE DOORS. APPLICANT'S APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH B WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT RETAINS THE DOOR, STAIRS AND WINDOW ON THE EASTERN NORTH PORTION OF THE FRONT ELEVATION. AS NOTED IN FINDING B, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT UPDATED DRAWING THAT REFLECTS THIS CHANGE. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS ACCURATE MEASURE PERMIT LEVEL ELEVATION, AND PLANS FROM THE STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND TO THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. AND THE APPLICANT DEAL IS ON THE LINE, UH, TO DISCUSS, UH, STIPULATION NUMBER ONE, EXCUSE . SURE. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DAVE . SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. WE UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, WE, I I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE, UH, ACCEPTING, UH, THE SECOND AND THIRD, UH, STIPULATIONS THAT, UH, YOU WISH TO DISCUSS THE FIRST STIPULATION. WELL, YEAH, LET ME TRY TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. ORIGINALLY WE HAD REQUESTED PERMISSION TO ADD A STAIRCASE TO THE EAST END OF THE BUILDING, BUT I NOTIFIED STAFF THAT WE WERE WITHDRAWING THAT REQUEST. AFTER WE MET WITH THE ARCHITECTS AND LOOKED AT IT, THERE WAS SOME SETBACK ISSUES AND VARIANCE ISSUES AND WE JUST FELT LIKE IT, IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE. SO WE, WE WITHDREW THAT REQUEST. UH, SO THERE, THERE IS NO EXISTING STAIRCASE ON THE, EACH END OF THE BUILDING. UH, WE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED TO ADD THAT, BUT WE, WE DRAWN THAT AND STEP CAN CLARIFY TOO. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, UM, TO MODIFY AND, AND AS JOE MENTIONED, WE'RE KIND OF FOCUSING ON THE . UM, RIGHT NOW THERE IS ONE SINGLE BAY GARAGE DOOR, UM, ON THE PROPERTY AND, UM, AS WELL AS OPEN AND A DOOR. AND THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING TO, UM, HAVE THREE SINGLE BAY GARAGE DOORS ENCOMPASSING THE FRONT, THE SIDE. UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS THAT THE APPLICANT SOURCE THAT SHOWED THAT THERE WAS A DOOR IN A WINDOW ON THE EASTERN LEFT SIDE OF THE FACADE. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE DIFFERENCE HERE, THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THROUGH DAYS AND WE'RE REQUESTING THAT HE, UM, INSTALL ONLY TWO AND KEEPS THAT SIDE CONFIGURATION WITH THE DOOR IN THE WINDOW. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, WITH ADDING THREE GARAGE DOORS, UH, HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO DEAL WITH THE CHANGE IN FLOOR ELEVATION AT THE, UH, RIGHT SIDE OF THIS STRUCTURE, WHICH REQUIRES TWO OR THREE STEPS TO GET UP INTO IT? THE, THE STRUCTURE IN THAT END OF THE BUILDING, UH, DOES NOT HAVE A CONCRETE SUBFLOOR. THE ORIGINAL BUILDING HAD TWO GARAGE BAYS. BOTH OF THOSE BAYS HAVE A CONCRETE SUBFLOOR. UH, SOMEONE AT SOME POINT IN TIME, WE GONNA KNOW WHEN CLOSED IN THE MIDDLE BAY. UH, AND, UH, THE, AND, AND THEN THEY JUST BUILT THAT, BUILT THAT OUT TO A PRETTY SHODDY KIND OF CONSTRUCTION THING. ON THE, ON THE END WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING ADDING A BAY, THERE'S A SIMPLY A, A WOODEN FLOOR IN THAT END OF THE BUILDING WHICH WOULD COME OUT AND A CONCRETE WOULD BE POURED, UH, AT THE SAME LEVEL IN ELEVATION AS IS UNDER THE OTHER TWO BAYS. THANK YOU. UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER RU. UM, AND MAYBE STAFF CAN CLARIFY THE REASON WHY YOU WANT, IS THAT BECAUSE IT WAS ORIGINALLY IS THAT WAS, I DON'T, WAS THE DOOR ON THE WINDOW ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING MOVED ORIGINALLY? YEAH. SO, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED, UM, ORIGINAL DRAWING AND LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET THE RIGHT, UM, I ACTUALLY REMEMBER NOW NUMBER. YEAH, YEAH. UM, SO IT SHOWS THE WINDOW AT THE DOOR OR NOT THE ORIGINAL ANYMORE, OR IS IT RIGHT REALLY THE FACADE CONFIGURATION. UM MM-HMM. , THAT, THAT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION ON, BUT THAT IT IS TRUE COMMISSIONER THAT THE DOOR AND THE WINDOW ARE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING AND THIS IS BASICALLY WHAT STAFF WOULD [02:00:01] LIKE, UM, WHICH IS TWO DOORS ON THE LEFT, A DOOR AND A WINDOW. AND I ALSO ACTUALLY, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND STAFF POSITION AND GOING BACK TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE, UM, IT, I DON'T MIND, UH, UM, THE THREE BASE PERSONALLY. UM, MAYBE ALSO BECAUSE I MEAN, FIRST YOU SAID YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO THE CONCRETE. UM, I, I FEEL LIKE IT'S MORE CONSISTENT. I DON'T, IF YOU HAVE TO GO BACK TO WHAT'S ORIGINALLY THERE, WHICH WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SCREEN WITH THAT DOOR AND THE STEPS AND THE WINDOW, I ACTUALLY, I MEAN, IF I HAD TO PICK BETWEEN THOSE, I WOULD PICK THE THREE GARAGE DOORS. IF YOU'RE ALSO AGREEING TO THE OTHER STIPULATIONS, I THINK I AM, AND, AND AESTHETICALLY WE FELT THE SAME WAY. I MEAN, TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO THE CONDITION WE LOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVE THE DEEPEST RESPECT FOR THE HISTORICAL ASPECT OF OUR HOME, UM, AND THE PROPERTY. UH, BUT WE FELT LIKE NUMBER ONE, IT GIVES US MUCH GREATER UTILITY FOR THE SPACE OUT THERE AND AESTHETICALLY GIVEN THE QUALITY OF DOORS AND THINGS THAT WE'RE GONNA USE, WE FELT LIKE IT WAS ACTUALLY, UH, AN IMPROVEMENT. I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. THE, THE FENESTRATION WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THE EAST, THE DOOR AND WINDOW, THAT FENESTRATION THAT IT, IT IS, UH, IT IS PRESENT AND UNALTERED. IS THAT CORRECT? WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE ORIGINAL DOOR AND WINDOW. SO IT IS PRESENT. UM, IT MAY HAVE BEEN ALTERED. UM, THE PROVIDED SOME GREAT, YOU KNOW, UH, DRAWINGS THAT SHOW THE ORIGINAL WHAT TO BELIEVE, UM, WHAT'S EXISTING AND WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. UM, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME, YOU KNOW, FRAMING AND OTHER SHIFTS BASED ON THE REPLACEMENT OF THE DOOR AND THE WINDOW. BUT UM, OVERALL THE PRESENCE OF THE DOOR AND THE WINDOW IN GENERAL IS WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING. SO BASED ON THIS ORIGINAL DRAWING. OKAY. AND ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION FOR STAFF, IS THIS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET THE EAST? IT IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND, UH, WHAT IS THE DATE THAT WE, UH, BELIEVE THAT THE GARAGE WAS BUILT AT THE SAME TIME AS THE HOUSE? YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. I I, I CAN APPRECIATE WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING HERE. I I TEND TO SUPPORT'S POSITION ANOTHER, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FITZER. ANOTHER QUESTION. UM, YOUR PROPOSAL IS HAVING THREE GARAGE DOORS. DO YOU ALL THE APPLICATION DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT, UH, A LARGER PARKING PAD OR EXTENDING THE DRIVEWAY UP TO THIS THIRD GARAGE DOOR. IS THAT ALSO YOUR INTENTION? WELL, IT IS, IT'S REALLY ALREADY THERE. UH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN TELL FROM, THERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH, UH, WE SUBMITTED, TAKEN FROM THE STREET, WHICH KIND OF SHOWS ALLOWS YOU TO LOOK, UH, AT THE, AT THE BASE OF THE STAIRS. THERE YOU GO. RIGHT HERE. LOOK THERE, GO BACK TO THAT ONE. THE ONE BEFORE WHICH GO BACK TO THE ONE BEFORE THIS. IT GIVES YOU, IT SHOWS YOU THE P THAT THE PAVING IS ALREADY THERE. HERE, THIS ONE I ONE THAT YOU WERE JUST ABOUT TO BRING UP. SORRY. KNOW OUR THING IS A LITTLE DELAYED, SO WE'LL THAT'S OKAY. I GET WHAT , SO STEPHANIE, CAN YOU SHOW US PHOTO SIX. SO HERE WE GO. SO AT, AT SOME POINT LONG BEFORE WE PURCHASED THE HOUSE, THE PAVERS WERE PUT IN, UH, ALL THE WAY UP TO THE FRONT OF THE GARAGE. SO DO YOU PROPOSE TO TAKE OUT THE TREE THAT'S AT THAT'S PRESENTLY THERE IN FRONT OF THE, THE TREE IS, YEAH, THE TREE IS ALREADY GONE. THESE PHOTOS WERE TAKEN SOME TIME AGO. YEAH. SO WHAT IS ON THE SCREEN NOW IS A PHOTO KIND OF FROM THE DRIVEWAY LOOKING STRAIGHT AT IT. WE SEE THE TREE, WE SEE THE, THE PAVERS. SO THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UM, I APPRECIATE, UH, THE APPLICANT'S, UH, REQUEST AND, AND ESPECIALLY REQUEST THAT THEIR OTHER, THEIR REQUEST DOESN'T INVOLVE JUST WHOLESALE DEMOLITION THAT WE VOTING SOMETHING NEW BACK THERE. I, I APPRECIATE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE USE OF THIS STRUCTURE AND DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE IDEA OF GOING BACK AND, UH, RECLAIMING THAT CENTRAL BAY, UH, WITH , UH, TAKING OUT THE SHOTTY INFILL. BUT I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THIS LITTLE STRUCTURE. AND THEY'RE BECOMING KIND OF MORE AND MORE ENDANGERED SPECIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU HAD SMALL [02:05:01] LIVING CORNERS THAT WERE ASSOCIATED ATTACHED TO THESE GRAND HOMES AND YOU DID HAVE A DIVERSITY OF, UH, ECONOMIC, UH, UH, CAPABILITY AND, AND, AND REPRESENTATION WITHIN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS. IT WASN'T JUST, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH NO ONE ELSE LIVING BACK THERE. SO I THINK THERE'S AN IMPORTANT CHAPTER IN THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE LOST IF YOU, UM, IF YOU TOOK AWAY THAT, UH, ELEMENT BACK THERE. BUT, UH, I'M, I AM, UH, VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THEM RETAINING THE STRUCTURE AND MAKING USE OF THE, THE SECOND BAY. I JUST THINK THAT THE EXTERIOR CONFIGURATION THAT STAFF IS, IS, UH, UM, HIGHLIGHTING HERE I THINK IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE STORY. AND, AND I I APPRECIATE AND RESPECT THE OPINIONS WITH RESPECT TO THAT. UH, JUST FROM THE, FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE USEFULNESS OF THE SPACE, UH, IT'S JUST NOT VERY USEFUL SPACE OR ANYTHING. UH, AND YOU CAN SEE ALONG MORE IN IT OR SOMETHING, BUT, UH, IT, IT IS JUST NOT VERY USEFUL SPACE. IT WAS ORIGINALLY THE WAY IT'S CONFIGURED THERE ORIGINALLY WAS A, A BATHROOM AND A SMALL CLOSET AND THEN THAT, I GUESS A, A BEDROOM IF YOU WILL. UH, AND, UH, SO THERE'S JUST NOT ANYTHING ABOUT THE SPACE THAT ALLOWS US TO REALLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT AND USE IT WELL. AND, UH, AGAIN, WITH ALL, YOU KNOW, GREAT RESPECT FOR HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPERTY AND ALL THAT, UH, WE AGAIN WOULD REQUEST THAT WE BE ALLOWED TO DO IT, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE WILL ABIDE BY THE COMMISSION'S DECISIONS. DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, CITIZEN COMMENTS ON THIS ONE? UM, NOT TO BE READ. I MIGHT HAVE A LETTER IN THE FOLDER. I DON'T HAVE THE LIST. OKAY. NO, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS. MR. CHAIR, ASK, UH, COREY, CAN YOU SHOW US A, SHOW ME A PICTURE OF THE FRONT. THIS IS QUE OF THE FRONT AS IT IS. ONE MOMENT HERE. I, I JUST, I I, MY FEELING IS THAT TO, TO STRONG, TO STRONG POINT THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WAS THERE IS PRESENT, BUT, BUT KIND OF ALTERED TO SUCH A DEGREE THAT IT LOSES A LOT OF THAT CHARACTER. THE THING IS THAT A GARAGE IS, UM, YOU KNOW, VERY, VERY UTILITARIAN. THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY A STREET FRONT. UM, UH, YOU KNOW, THE EXPECTATION IS REALLY A PRIVATE ONE. UM, ASK MYSELF IF SOMEONE HAD THAT BACK IN THE DAY, WOULD THEY HAVE DONE WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED? AND YOU KNOW, THE ANSWER TO ME COMES BACK IS YES, IT'S VERY REASONABLE. SO I I WOULD TEND TO, TO AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT, UM, THAT THE UTILITY IS, IS VERY IMPORTANT PROVIDED THAT IT'S DONE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE EXPECTATION, RIGHT, THE, A ARCHITECTURE. AND I THINK, I THINK THAT THEY'RE BEING VERY SENSITIVE TO, TO ACHIEVING THAT, THAT ALTERATION. UM, YOU KNOW, I, UM, I, UM, I'M AWARE OF SOME OF THE, THAT'S DONE WHEN, WHEN A BUILDING IS DEMOLISHED AND YOU DO HAVE THE DRAWINGS AND THE DRAWINGS REPRESENT WHAT WAS THERE. AND I THINK THAT THE DOCUMENTS SHOW THAT, YOU KNOW, A CLEAR HISTORY HAS BEEN RECORDED OF, OF WHAT WAS THERE. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S EQUALLY AS VALUABLE AS BEING ABLE TO TELL THE STORY. UM, SO I I I WOULD TEND TO, TO, UM, A AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT WITH RESPECT TO THEIR USE. RIGHT. UM, I THINK IT'S A, IT IS A, IT IS A, IT'S, IT'S, IT IS A, A NICE, UM, IMPROVEMENT AND, UH, I I DON'T KNOW IF, IF THERE'S ANY, IF THERE'S ENOUGH, UH, AGREEMENT WITH THAT, BUT, UH, OKAY, SURE. GO AHEAD. I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ'S [02:10:01] COMMENT BECAUSE, UH, I'M NOT COUCHING MY COMMENTS WITHIN AN AESTHETIC STANDPOINT HERE. I THINK WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS AESTHETICALLY VERY NEEDS IN INAPPROPRIATE, UH, MINE WAS MORE FROM THE HISTORIC, THE HISTORIC LEGACY. THERE WAS A DIVERSITY OF, OF PEOPLE LIVING IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND THERE WAS A WHOLE SURVEY CLASS THAT MADE THESE BIG HOUSES POSSIBLE AT THAT TIME THAT, UH, THIS ARCHITECTURE REPRESENTS THAT. AND YES, IT'S VERY UTILITARIAN AND, BUT THAT ALSO REPRESENTS KIND OF THE AUTHENTIC HISTORY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT, UM, THERE, THERE, IT WASN'T JUST A HOMOGENOUS, WEALTHY, PRIVILEGED GROUP OF PEOPLE LIVING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE WERE ALSO PEOPLE THAT HELPED TO SUPPORT AND MAINTAIN THESE HOUSES, AND THAT'S WHERE THEY LIVED. AND, UH, UH, MR. MR. CHAIRMAN AND VELASQUE AGAIN, AND MR. CARPENTER, AND I REALLY DO, I I REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. I REALLY DO. I I WANT YOU TO, TO KNOW THAT, THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT I, I LOOK FOR THAT REALLY CAN OF, UH, WHEN THEY DON'T REQUIRE WORDS, READ THOSE THINGS THAT CAPTURE THE POETICS OF SPACE. AND WHEN YOU HAVE A, A SET OF STAIRS AND A DOOR AND A, AND A WINDOW PROPERTY PLACED OR PLACED IN THE PLACE THAT YOU KNOW, THAT IT, THAT IT WOULD BE, IT, IT, IT REALLY MARKS THE SCALE AND TAKES YOU TO A TIME EVEN JUST IN THE EXPERIENCE OF IT ALL. SO I, I COMPLETELY HONOR THE, THE, THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'RE MAKING. THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE STRONG COMMENTS AND, AND, AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, I, AND IT, AND IT IS ONE OF THESE SITUATIONS THAT, THAT TEARS ME. THE, THE, THE TENSION BETWEEN THE USE, THE UTILITY, THE PERSON THAT MAINTAINS AND OWNS RIGHT. AND THE ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF, OF SOMETHING THAT IS SO PRECIOUS, RIGHT? SO I'M, I'M NOT, I I IN NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM OR WANT TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE YOU IMPRESSION THAT I, I DON'T, UH, FEEL, UH, EXACTLY AS YOU FEEL WANT END. I, I JUST, I WANTED TO JUST DEMONSTRATE, ATE THE TENSION THAT I KIND OF HAVE WITH RESPECT TO THE, THE, THE WAY THE PRESENTATION IS GIVEN. I MEAN, HE COULD HAVE GIVEN THE PRESENTATION A LOT OF WAYS, BUT I, I TEND TO LIKE DEAL FOR HIM. IT JUST, YOU COME ACROSS VERY THAT WAY, SIR. SO I, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE BOTH, BOTH, I GUESS. UH, THANKS. I, A QUESTION FROM THE APPLICANT. YES. MS. GREN? YES. UM, THESE GARAGE FIRST 10 WERE BACK THEN A LOT SMALLER. SO, UM, I WAS JUST THINKING IS THIS EVEN POSSIBLE FOR YOU BASED ON PLACEMENT OF THE DOOR IN THE WINDOW? UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY MEASUREMENTS THAT BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH A NINE FOOT GARAGE DOOR OR WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO DO? I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS EVEN POSSIBLE FOR YOU. YEAH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEASURE ELEVATIONS THAT WE PROVIDED TO YOU FROM THE ARCHITECTS, UM, THE, UH, THE BAYS WOULD BE, UH, NINE, NINE FEET WIDE AND I BELIEVE SEVEN FEET TALL, UH, WHICH IS A STANDARD MODERN GARAGE DOOR. THE ORIGINAL TWO BAYS THAT WERE THERE, ONE OF THOSE, THE ONE THAT REMAINS. AND I BELIEVE THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN ALTERED IN SIZE. IT'S HARD TO TELL BECAUSE THE DOORS ARE NOT ORIGINAL. AND QUITE FRANKLY, EVEN THE FRAMING AROUND THE DOOR IS NOT ORIGINAL, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE, AND, AND THE ARCHITECTS AGREED WITH THIS, THAT THOSE DOORS ARE PRESENTLY EIGHT FEET. THAT DOOR IS PRESENTLY EIGHT FEET WIDE AND IT IS ABOUT SEVEN AND A HALF FEET TALL. IT'S NOT, UH, A STANDARD GARAGE DOOR SIZE. UM, IT'S, IT IS HARD TO TELL THE, WHAT THE MIDDLE BAY ORIGINALLY WAS. IF YOU LOOK AT THE BLUEPRINTS, WHICH ARE THE ORIGINAL BLUEPRINTS, UM, IT, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THAT MIDDLE BAY WAS ORIGINALLY THE SAME SIZE AS THE, AS THE EXISTING BANK TO THE LEFT. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THEY, UH, WHEN THEY CLOSED THAT UP, THEY DID A FAIRLY SLOPPY JOB ON THE OUTSIDE OF KIND OF STUCCO IT. AND THERE'S AN EDGE AND A RIDGE ALL THE WAY AROUND AND WHERE YOU CAN SEE WHERE THEY KIND OF PLASTERED WHERE THE ORIGINAL DOOR WAS. AND THEN, BUT WHEN THEY PUT THE WINDOW AND THE AIR CONDITIONER IN, I, I DON'T KNOW, UH, IT APPEARS THAT THOSE ARE WITHIN THE CONFINES OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY DOOR SPACE. UH, BUT THOSE, THOSE DRAWINGS SHOW THAT THERE IS, UH, PLENTY OF SPACE TO DO THE THREE BAYS AT, I BELIEVE, NINE FEET WIDE. AND, AND WHAT ABOUT THE TWO BAYS? IF YOU WERE TO RETAIN THE DOOR IN THE WINDOW, ARE YOU ABLE TO DO TWO BAYS WITH, YOU KNOW, SPOT SIZE THAT YOU WOULD NEED TODAY? FOR TODAY'S CALL, IT'S PROBABLY NOT. IT'S GONNA BE REALLY HARD [02:15:01] BECAUSE THE, THE EXISTING BAY IS ABOUT EIGHT FEET WIDE AND I KEEP A CAR, I HAVE AN ANTIQUE CAR, I LOVE CARS. I KEEP A CAR IN THAT BAY, BUT IT IS AN OLD CAR AND IT FITS, BUT IT'S TIGHT. IT IS A CAR FROM THE EARLY FIFTIES. UM, I I, WHAT I BELIEVE THE ARCHITECTS FELT LIKE WAS THAT IF WE WERE RESTRICTED TO CREATING THE BAY THE ORIGINAL SIZE, IT PROBABLY WOULD NOT ACCOMMODATE A MODERN CAR. AND THE LAST THING I WOULD POINT OUT TO THE COMMISSIONERS IS JUST THAT IF THE STEPS IN THE DOOR AND THE WINDOWS AND ALL THAT WERE ORIGINAL AND THAT WERE ORIGINAL COMPONENTS, UH, YOU KNOW, I CAN UNDERSTAND THE COMMITTEE'S, UH, HARDER FOR HANGING ONTO THOSE. YOU CAN TELL FROM THE DRAWINGS THAT THE STEPS WERE ORIGINALLY WOODEN STEPS. THERE'S A, A CONCRETE STEPS THERE. NOW THE DOOR IS A MODERN KIND OF FIBERGLASS DOOR, UM, AND THE WINDOWS APPEAR TO BE MUCH, MUCH LATER THAN, UH, THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. SO E EVEN IF, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD PUT THAT BACK, UH, TO WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY I GUESS IT COULD BE DONE, BUT ESSENTIALLY WE'D BE PRESERVING SOME ARTIFACTS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE BUILDING LATER THAT DON'T REALLY HAVE SIGN ANY HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. AND I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS, UH, FROM Y'ALL ABOUT THE USE OF THAT SPACE AND WHAT IT REPRESENTED IN A TIME PASSED AND ALL THAT. AND I, I SURELY APPRECIATE THIS. UM, IT'S JUST HARD FOR US AND PROBABLY FOR FUTURE OWNERS TO FIND REAL USEFULNESS IN THAT SPACE, UM, THE WAY IT'S CONFIGURED. OKAY, SO BASED ON THIS CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW, I'M GONNA VENTURE OUT YOUR MOTION THAT I SEE THERE'S A LOT OF SPLIT, BUT I'M GONNA TRY MY MOTION JUST BECAUSE I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE MAKE SURE THAT HE UNDERSTANDS MAY NOT, IF IT GOES THROUGH, IF IT DOESN'T, UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE. HAS THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED WITH STIPULATION TWO AND THREE? UH, NOT STIPULATION ONE AND, AND BASICALLY IT IS, I DO, I DO AGREE WITH RETAINING ORIGINALLY FENESTRATION AND, AND RETAINING, ESPECIALLY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I JUST, I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S, WE NEED TO SOMETIMES ALSO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE CURRENT NEEDS. THAT GARAGE DOOR THAT'S EXISTING RIGHT NOW WILL NOT FIT A NORMAL CAR FOR TODAY, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S POSSIBLE FOR THE APPLICANT TO EVEN DO TO GARAGE DOORS AND RETAIN THE DOOR AND THE, AND THE ORIGINAL DOOR, ORIGINAL WINDOW. MAY I ASK A SECOND? CHAIRMAN, FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? OH WAIT, HONOR, IT WAS WITH STIPULATIONS TWO AND THREE OF, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT APPROVAL WITH THE THREE DOORS. OKAY. UM, FERNANDEZ, AYE ISH. NA GIBBS AYE. AYE. CARPENTER NAY, RUBE AYE. BOWMAN. AYE THAT SIR? NAY? UM, LA NAY, I, UM, I HAVE TO FOUR. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. I GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK COMMISSIONERS. BEFORE WE GET TO OUR LAST ITEM, WE HAVE A FEW THAT ARE LEAVING US, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE IT, UH, CLEAR FOR THE RECORD THAT WE STILL HAVE A QUORUM. UM, SO COMMISSIONER FISH HAS STEPPED AWAY AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER, UM, FERNANDEZ IS ALSO AND COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, BUT WE HAVE SIX COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. OKAY, RACHEL AGENDA [20-3477 Address/Description: 2160 W SUMMIT AVE HDRC Case No.: 2020-216 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: Sarah Manzke/MANZKE SARAH S & MARC D & Request: Modify existing rear privacy fence City Council Dist.: 7] ITEM NUMBER 26 H G R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH TWO 16 ADDRESS, 2160 WEST SUMMIT AVENUE. THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL TWO ADDITIONAL FEET OF HEIGHT TO THE EXISTING SIX FOOT HIGH REAR PRIVACY FENCE RECOMMENDATION THAT DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH B. AND THE APPLICANT SARAH IS ON THE LINE. [02:20:04] IS THE APPLICANT THERE? UH, HELLO? YES. HI. YES, UM, I, UH, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU ALL TODAY. UM, SO THE KIND OF BRIEF SUMMARY HERE IS LAST YEAR WE HAD RECEIVED ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL FOR THE HORIZONTAL FETAL PRIVACY FENCE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE AND BUILT ON THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE. SO TODAY WE ARE ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO FEET OF HEIGHT IN THE SAME MATERIALITY. SO, UM, A COUPLE THINGS. THE PROPOSED FENCE LINE WAS NOT BLOCKIES FROM THE STREET AND IT IS SIGNIFICANTLY BEHIND THE FRONT SETBACK OF BOTH OUR HOME AS WELL AS THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR. KIND OF, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS I CAN GET THE MOST IMPORTANT IS THE FINISH FLOOR HEIGHT OF BOTH OUR HOUSE AS WELL AS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY ARE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN GRADE, THEREFORE, ADDITIONAL HEIGHT IS PREFERRED FOR PRIVACY ON THE FENCE LINE. UM, ADDITIONALLY, THE STILL HEIGHT OF THE NEIGHBOR'S WINDOWS, UH, ARE ALL ENTIRELY ABOVE THE EXISTING FENCE ALREADY. SO, UM, ONE FURTHER THING IS THAT WITHIN JUST ONE WALK RADIUS OF OUR HOUSE, UH, WE HAVE FOUND IT, WE SEVERAL EXAMPLES OF PRIVACY FENCE HEIGHTS THAT EXCEED SIX FEET. UM, MANY CASES GOING TO EIGHT FEET, UM, ALL WITHIN THE 2020 100 BLOCKS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. UM, I JUST PROBABLY JUST NEED TO SAY SOMETHING. UH, I GET FOUR DOORS DOWN. SO, UM, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE, UH, AMOUNT OF EIGHT FOOT FENCE ON THIS BLOCK OF THE STREET. UM, I JUST WANTED TO ASK THE APPLICANT, UM, CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THE REASON, AND THEN I, I SEE THERE'S A DIFFERENT IN THE HEIGHTS OF THE HOMES, WHICH I ALSO NOTICED. UM, WHAT'S THE REASON OR WHAT WAS, WHERE WOULD BE THE PRIVACY NEED? THANK YOU. SO THE PRIVACY NEED IS ALONG THIS EASTERN SIDE. UM, WE ARE HAVING SOME ISSUES WITH THE NEIGHBORS TO OUR EAST, UM, WITH SORT OF UNSOLICITED AND CONTINUED HARASSMENT. UM, THERE HAS BEEN, UH, TWO DIFFERENT POLICE REPORTS FILED, UM, WITH THIS HARASSMENT AND IT SEEMS TO BE ONGOING WITH NO REAL END IN SIGHT. SO OUR, THE WHOLE REASON WE'RE, WE'RE APPLYING TO THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE, UM, WE LOVE NEIGHBORS, BUT WITH THIS PARTICULAR, UM, SET, WE ARE HAVING ISSUES THAT WE WOULD LIKE MORE PRIVACY TO MORE COMFORTABLE GOING OUT IN THE BACKYARD OF THE HOMES THAT WE, THAT WE BOUGHT AND LOVE SPENDING TIME IN. IS THE BACK FENCE SIX FEET TWO OR I IT SEEMS LOWER ON THE PICTURE. YES, IT'S ALL SIX. YES. MRS. CHAIRMAN FETZER. UM, ARE YOU REQUESTING EIGHT FEET FOR THE ENTIRE YARD OR JUST THIS, UH, EAST FENCE? NO, ONLY THIS EASTERN SIDE. WE, WE DON'T, UH, INTEND TO ALTER THE OTHER ONES AT THIS TIME AT ALL. UH, SO YOU COULD, UH, THE VIDEO RIGHT NOW IS A LITTLE BIT FINE, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SITE PLAN WE HAD HIGHLIGHTED THIS EXACT, UH, THE EASTERN SIDE IN GREEN. IT RUNS NORTH SOUTH. IT ALSO LOOKED THE PHOTO THAT SHOWS THE FENCE, LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE PLANTED SOME, UH, SHRUBS OR SOMETHING IN FRONT OF YOUR FENCE. UH, YES. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE, THE, UH, GROWTH PATTERN ON THESE, THE EVENTUAL HEIGHT OF THESE SHRUBS WOULD BE? YEAH, SO, SO WE PLANTED, UM, A GOOD, A GOOD BIT OF PLANTS, UM, REALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF, WE PREFER LANDSCAPE PRIVACY IN MOST CASES WHEN WE CAN ACHIEVE IT. UM, SO WE PLANTED ALL NATIVE SPECIES. WE HAVE SAVED AND , UM, THE, THEY GET FROM ANYWHERE, YOU KNOW, ABOUT SIX TO EIGHT FEET. UM, BUT IT TAKES A NUMBER OF YEARS TO GET THERE. UM, AND WE HAVE VARIOUS SUN AND SHADE CONDITIONS ALONG FENCE LINE AS WELL. SO WE'VE PLANTED SOME, UM, SORT OF IN THE HOPES THAT IN THE FUTURE THAT WE'LL PROVIDE LANDSCAPE PRIVACY. UM, BUT I AM VERY MUCH HOPING THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO GET ADDITIONAL PRIVACY NOW, UM, SO THAT WE CAN SPEND TIME IN THE BACKYARD FEELING SAFE. , THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. SO NORMALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, EIGHT FEET IS THE REASON WHY YOU'RE IN FRONT OF US BECAUSE SIX IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE APPROVED RIGHT AWAY. UM, AND JUST BECAUSE OF PREVIOUS ALSO, UH, CASES THAT WE'VE SEEN. AND I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. I MEAN, UM, HOW, HOW ARE YOU GONNA, ARE YOU GONNA ATTACH WITH, UH, ADDITIONAL HOLES THAT WILL BE SEPARATE FROM THE EXISTING? IS THERE SOME WAY, WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET, IS THERE SOME WAY THAT IF THOSE TWO FEET CAN BE REMOVED, IF THERE'S A CHANGE IN [02:25:01] NEIGHBOR OR YOU DECIDE TO MOVE? UH, I, I WOULD, UH, IF I CAN SPEAK TO THAT. UM, SO WE WORKED WITH, WITH THE PEOPLE THAT BUILT THE FENCE, UM, TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE HAD INTENDED. WE HAVE FOUR BY FOUR SEATER POSTS CURRENTLY. UM, AND UH, OUR IDEA AFTER SPEAKING WITH THEM TO SEE IF IT WAS EVEN FEASIBLE IS TO JUST SIMPLY ADD AN ADDITIONAL TWO FEET TO THE TOP OF THAT THAT COULD BE REMOVED AT ANOTHER TIME. AND THEY ATTACH TO THE EXISTING OVER FOUR C TO POST? YES, CORRECT. UM, I'M GONNA TRY. UM, I, I KNOW HOW THIS PROPERTY ALSO SETS BACK A LOT FROM THE FRONT, UM, OF THE STREET. UM, ALL THE HOMES ALMOST DO THAT ON THIS LOCK. I MEAN A LOT IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, AREA VIEW, UM, SO THERE'S A LOT OF TREES AND A LOT OF, UH, LANDSCAPING IN THE FRONT YARD TOO. BUT ACTUALLY IT'S EVEN HARD TO SEE THAT FENCE. UM, I'LL BE HONEST, I COULDN'T SEE IT FROM THE STREET. AND SO I'M GONNA MOVE TO MOTION TO APPROVE AS THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I THINK, UH, MR. UH, GROUP ARTICULATED MY THOUGHTS ON THAT, THAT IT IS FAR ENOUGH BACK AND I LIKE THE IDEA IF WE COULD HAVE SOMEHOW BOLTED CONNECTION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT ALLOWS IT TO BE DISASSEMBLED LATER, UH, IF EITHER CONDITIONS CHANGE OR THE THE PLAYERS INVOLVED IN THE, IN THIS DRAMA CHANGE. SO, UH, I SECOND THAT MOTION SAYS CHAIRMAN FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. UM, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? YES. GIBBS A QUE AYE CARPENTER AYE RUB? AYE BOWMAN, I'M SORRY, BOWMAN IS LEFT. THAT SIR NAYYY NAYYY THAT FORWARDED TO MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [20-3455 Address/Description: 335 TRAIL HDRC Case No.: 2020-201 Historic District Name: River Road RIO District: RIO-1 Request: Construction of a multi-structure development City Council Dist.: 1] UM, COMMISSIONERS, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, ITEM 27 HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO JUNE 17TH AND WILL NOT BE HEARD [Approval of HDRC Meeting Minutes for May 29, 2020.] TODAY. UM, THAT BRINGS US TO APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 29TH. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 29TH AS SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER MCG GIVES I SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? I GET A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT. MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. GOODNIGHT EVERYONE. AYE. THANK YOU CHAIRMAN. * 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.