[00:00:13]
I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17TH, 2020.
MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE?
[Roll Call]
FERNANDEZ FERNANDEZ LEFT.AND BEFORE WE BEGIN, WE DO HAVE A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT FROM TRANSLATION SERVICES.
WHEN I STARTED THIS LOS THANK YOU.
[Chairman’s Statement]
STATEMENT? THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.I AM JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN, AND THE VICE CHAIR IS SCOTT CARPENTER.
IT IS THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER AND ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS, FOR LANDMARKS, FOR CITY PROPERTY, ON CITY PROPERTY IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY, AND FOR DEMOLITIONS.
AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION WILL BE, SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND, AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL AND APPEAL DECISION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOP CODE.
THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH THIS MEETING THROUGH LIVESTREAM.
THEY CAN ALSO LISTEN TO THE MEETING THROUGH AUDIO ONLY 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 AS 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 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.
WOW, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR LONG ENOUGH.
YOU THINK I WOULD KNOW TO UNMUTE.
UM, SO WE'LL BEGIN SHORTLY BY DISPLAYING THE LIST OF CASES TO BE HEARD TODAY.
UM, JUST AS USUAL, WE HAVE CASES THAT ARE INCLUDED ON A CONSENT AGENDA.
THOSE ARE CASES WHERE THE STAFF HAVE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO MEET ALL OF OUR STAFF'S, UH, RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS.
UM, WHEN WE GET TO THE LIST, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE WHICH ITEMS HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS OR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE WILL FIRST REVIEW ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS PROVIDED FOR THOSE ITEMS BEFORE TAKING ACTION AT ONCE.
UM, WRITTEN COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED OUTSIDE OF THE, UH, MEETING GUIDELINES HAVE ALSO BEEN PROVIDED IN YOUR REVIEW FOLDER AS LETTERS.
JUST A REMINDER, WE ASK THAT YOU REMAIN MUTED.
UM, UNLESS YOU ARE SPEAKING, THAT'S GONNA HELP US PRESERVE THE SOUND QUALITY FOR THE MEETING.
UM, FOR EACH CASE, WE WILL START, AS WE ALWAYS DO, BY READING THE REQUE REQUEST LANGUAGE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UH, WE WILL CALL IN THE APPLICANT FOR EACH OF THOSE CASES TO LISTEN AND PROVIDE, UH, COMMENT TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
UM, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, UM, AND THEN PAUSE BEFORE SPEAKING.
THAT WAY WE'RE NOT SPEAKING OVER ONE ANOTHER.
UM, AND WITH THAT, WE'RE READY TO REVIEW
[Consent Agenda]
THE CASE LIST.UM, SO YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE 13 ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY.
UM, YOU, YOU CAN SEE WHICH PUBLIC COMMENTS WE HAVE.
UM, I'M GONNA BE READING SIX, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED.
[00:05:01]
WE ALSO HAVE A VOICEMAIL THAT WILL BE PLAYED FOR ITEM EIGHT.UM, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL FOUR LETTERS, UM, THAT ARE PROVIDED IN YOUR REVIEW PACKET AS WELL.
SO ITEM 1 10 24 DAWSON, UM, SUBMITTED BY SCOTT ALBERT ON BEHALF OF SEVERAL NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORS IN THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE SUPPORT O H P WITH AN EMPHASIS ON REDUCING BUILDING HEIGHT FOR THE APARTMENT BEHIND THE MODEST SINGLE STORY HOUSE, THE EXISTING CONDITION, EXISTING CONDITIONS, PHOTOS SHOWS FULLY LEAVE DECIDUOUS TREES BLOCKING THE VIEW, WHICH WILL NOT ALWAYS BE THE CASE.
REQUESTING THE APPLICANT TO EXPLORE WAYS TO REDUCE HEIGHT.
SHOULD INCLUDE LOWERING 10 FEET.
SECOND, SHOULD BE, EXCUSE ME, SHOULD INCLUDE LOWERING 10 FOOT SECOND FLOOR WALL PLATES AND POSSIBLY UTILIZING DORMERS THAT ARE MORE COMMON IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, THE NEXT IS FOR ITEM 4 6 34 MUNCIE.
UM, AGAIN SUBMITTED BY SCOTT ALBERT.
UM, WE SUBMIT, WE SUPPORT O H P AND THE PROJECT.
THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF HOW USING HISTORIC PLAN LAYOUTS CAN CREATE WELL PROPORTIONED INFILL.
ITEM 5 11 19 NORTH OLIVE, SUBMITTED BY SCOTT ALBERT.
UM, WE SUPPORT BOTH OF O AHPS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THAT CASE.
ITEM SEVEN IS 39 0 3 NORTH ST.
UM, THE FIRST LETTER WAS SUBMITTED BY MIMI QUINTANILLA, ONE 50 OSTROM.
THE GARAGE IS FOR ALL BRACKENRIDGE PARK USERS.
THE DESIGN ENHANCEMENTS THE ZOO DEVELOPED WERE PUSHED FORWARD WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY'S OWN PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AS CITY COUNCIL COMMITTED TO IN JANUARY OF 2019, WE EXPECT THE CITY TO ALWAYS HONOR THE PUBLIC'S TRUST AND ADHERE TO ITS COMMITMENT AND TO MEANINGFUL, TRANSPARENT, INCLUSIVE AND RESPONSIVE RESPONSIVE ENGAGEMENT.
ESPECIALLY WHEN PUBLIC FUNDS ARE USED SELECTIVELY, IGNORING THE CITY'S OWN COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY BY FACILITATING THE ELIMINATION OF PUBLIC INPUT IS NOT AN OPTION.
IMPLEMENTING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND GATHERING INPUT AND FEEDBACK ON THE DESIGN ENHANCEMENTS WILL NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT PARK USERS' ABILITY TO USE THE ALREADY OPERATIONAL GARAGE.
IT WILL, HOWEVER, ENSURE THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO ITS CITIZENS IS UPHELD AND FULFILLED.
H C R C SHOULD SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE TO THE CITY LEADERSHIP AND STAFF TO STAND TO BY ITS COMMITMENT TO THE PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
ON MAY 14TH, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED AN ADDITIONAL $800,000 OF FUNDING FOR THESE ENHANCEMENTS.
THAT MONEY IS TO COME FROM THE 2017 BOND PARKING OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
THIS MONEY DOES NOT NEED TO BE SPENT SO QUICKLY THAT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT CANNOT BE CONDUCTED IN A TIME OF CUTS AND ARTS.
FUNDING $800,000 CAN SUPPORT LOCAL ARTISTS WITH COMMISSIONS TO ENHANCE THE PARKING GARAGE AND RESULT IN A FAR MORE ATTRACTIVE AND CREATIVE SOLUTIONS TO BRANDING THE PROMINENTLY LOCATED STRUCTURE.
WHY IS THIS NOT A PART OF THE PLAN? H C R C MUST ASSIST THE COMMUNITY TO, TO HOLD THE CITY ACCOUNTABLE BY ITS OWN PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC'S TRUST FOR THIS IN FUTURE PROJECTS.
UM, SECOND COMES FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OF THE REVISED SIGNAGE FOR THE NEW CITY PARKING GARAGE ONTO LETTA DRIVE.
ADJACENT TO THE SAN ANTONIO ZOO IN BRACKEN RIDGE PARK.
THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE ZOO, THE BRACKEN RIDGE PARK CONSERVANCY, CITY OFFICIALS AND STAFF FOR WORKING TOGETHER TO REACH A COMPROMISED PLAN THAT SATISFIES ALL PARTIES.
WE ARE PLEASED THAT THE SIGNAGE WILL SUPPORT AND PROMOTE TWO SAN ANTONIO TREASURES, BRACKEN RIDGE PARK AND THE SAN ANTONIO ZOO.
THE THIRD TRUMPS FROM TIM MORROW, 39 0 3 NORTH ST.
UH, MY NAME IS TIM MORROW, C E O OF THE SAN ANTONIO ZOO.
ON BEHALF OF OUR BOARD STAFF, VOLUNTEERS AND MILLIONS OF VISITORS, I'M RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING APPROVAL OF ITEM SEVEN ZOO PARKING GARAGE.
WE HAVE WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH CITY STAFF, BRACKENRIDGE PARK CONSERVANCY, AMAR ARCHITECTS, AND OTHERS OVER THE, OVER ONE YEAR OF THIS DESIGN.
UM, IN THE PAST 30 DAYS, WE HAVE ADDED AN ADJUSTED SIGN IS FOR BRACKEN RIDGE PARK.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE CREATED A FUN EDUCATIONAL AND WELL-BALANCED PACKAGE THAT WILL CREATE IN ICONIC BUILDING IN SAN ANTONIO.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE OUR VOICEMAIL TO BE PLAYED NEXT FOR ITEM EIGHT 400 EAGLE WIND.
I AM REPRESENTING THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION'S ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FROM FOUR FOR 400 EAGLE LAND CASE 2 0 2 OH DASH 2 4 8.
NUMBER EIGHT ON TODAY'S AGENDA, THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEWED THE REQUEST AND FINDS THAT NOT ALL PERTINENT INFORMATION HAS BEEN PRESENTED IN THE APPLICATION EXISTING SIGNS.
CURRENTLY, THERE ARE TWO EXISTING SIGNS ON CAMPUS THAT WERE NOT IDENTIFIED IN THIS APPLICATION.
YOU HAVE PHOTOS ALONG WITH THIS LETTER.
A TWO-SIDED CAMPUS IDENTIFICATION SIGN MOUNTED BETWEEN TWO BRICK PILLARS IS LOCATED NEAR IN PERPENDICULAR TO EAGLE LAND.
THE SIGN PHASE IS APPROXIMATELY 24 SQUARE FEET PER SIDE FOR A TOTAL OF 48 SQUARE FEET JUST WITHIN THE ALLOWABLE 50 SQUARE FEET.
THIS SIGN WAS FUNDED BY THE BRACKEN RIDGE ALUMNI CLASS OF 1994.
ADDITIONALLY, AN EXISTING MARQUESS SIGN LOCATED AT SOUTH ST.
MARY'S IS ABOUT 16 FEET IN HEIGHT WITH A DOUBLE-SIDED SIGN
[00:10:01]
FACE OF APPROXIMATELY 30 SQUARE FEET.THE COMBINED FACE AREA OF THESE TWO EXISTING SIGNS IS 108 SQUARE FEET.
THE APPLICATION IS SILENT ON WHETHER THESE EXISTING SIGNS WILL REMAIN OR BE DEMOLISHED.
UH, THE PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN, ALTHOUGH THE APPLICATION STATES THAT AN EXISTING LIMESTONE WALL WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THIS SIGN, THE WALL IS IN FACT A NEW WALL THAT WAS JUST CONSTRUCTED WITH THE CURRENT SCHOOL EXPANSION PROJECT.
DETAILS DESCRIBING ITS CONSTRUCTION CAN BE FOUND ON SHEET A S OH OH TWO DATED TWO SIX 2019.
IN THIS APPLICATION, THE PROPOSED DOUBLE-SIDED SIGN FACED IS 79 SQUARE FEET MOUNTED ON TOP OF THE NEW LIMESTONE WALL PROPOSED DIGITAL MARQUEE.
THE PROPOSED DIGITAL MARQUEE HAS A DOUBLE-SIDED FACE OF 82 SQUARE FEET, ELEVATED ON TWO POSTS OVER ANOTHER UNMENTIONED DOUBLE-SIDED SIGN OF 98 SQUARE FEET WITH LETTERS MOUNTED ON A NEW LIMESTONE WALL.
THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED APPROVAL OF A DIGITAL SIGN IN OCTOBER OF 2018, AND AGAIN IN JANUARY OF 2019.
SINCE DIGITAL SIGNS ARE PROHIBITED, THE REQUESTS WERE DENIED.
THE SIGN FACE AREA OF REQUESTED NEW SIGNS IS 518 SQUARE FEET COUPLED WITH 108 SQUARE FEET OF EXISTING SIGNS FOR A TOTAL OF 626 SQUARE FEET.
GRANTED, THIS IS A LARGE CAMPUS AND IDENTIFICATION SIGNS BEYOND THE ALLOWABLE IS CERTAINLY JUSTIFIED.
HOWEVER, WE CANNOT SUPPORT THE APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST AT THIS TIME BECAUSE OF THE AMBIGUITIES IN THE APPLICATION AND SUGGESTS THAT THE APPLICANT RETURN TO THE H D R C WITH A MASTER SIGNAGE PLAN THAT ADDRESSES EXISTING AND NEW IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE AS WELL AS WAYFINDING SIGNAGE.
BRACKENRIDGE HIGH SCHOOL IS THE SOUTHERN ENTRANCE INTO THE KING WILLIAM HISTORIC DISTRICT AND A WELL-PLANNED SIGNAGE MASTER PLAN IN KEEPING WITH THE DESIGN GUIDELINES IS CURRENTLY WARRANTED.
OKAY, SO THAT CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
FOR ITEMS ON LINCOLN CONSENT AGENDA, UM, YOU CAN SEE WE DO HAVE ONE RECUSAL FROM COMMISSIONER LA FOR ITEM 13.
WE DO HAVE ENOUGH OTHER COMMISSIONERS PRESENT IF YOU WANT TO RECUSE FROM THE ENTIRE VOTE ON CONSENT AGENDA WHERE YOU CAN JUST, UH, MUTE YOURSELF AND TURN OFF YOUR MICRO OR TURN OFF YOUR VIDEO CAMERA AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION WITHOUT YOU ON THOSE.
UM, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR WANT TO PULL ANY OF THE ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? COREY, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
I I THINK I'D LIKE TO PULL NUMBER EIGHT OF THE EAGLE LAND DRIVE JUST FOR A FEW QUESTIONS IF WE CAN GET THAT APPLICANT OKAY ONLINE.
OKAY, STEPHANIE, WE'LL START CALLING THEM NOW.
ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, WITH THAT WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE REMAINDER.
THAT'S GONNA BE ITEMS ONE THROUGH SEVEN AND THEN NINE THROUGH 13.
AND COMMISSIONER LFO HAS RECUSED.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
I MOVE FOR APPROVAL FOR ITEMS ONE THROUGH SEVEN AND NINE THROUGH 13 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND FOR APPROVAL FOR ITEMS ONE THROUGH SEVEN AND ITEMS NINE THROUGH 13 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
MAY I ROLL CALL PLEASE? YES, FERNANDEZ.
[20-3771 Address/Description: 400 EAGLELAND DR HDRC Case No.: 2020-248 Public Property: G.W. Brackenridge High School Landmark Name: Brackenridge School Historic District Name: King William RIO District: RIO-4 Applicant: Wanira Magaloni/Stantec Architecture Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 5 ]
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.STEPHANIE, ARE YOU READY? I'M GONNA UNMUTE YOU NOW.
ARE THERE STEPHANIE? YES, I AM HERE AND THE APPLICANT RA IS ON THE LINE.
RA, CAN YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF? HI, GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M THE PROJECT MANAGER OF THE CURRENT ADDITION RENOVATION PROJECT FOR BROOKLYN REGION HIGH SCHOOL AND I WORK WITH FINTECH ARCHITECTURE.
UM, THIS CASE WAS PULLED FOR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER FISH.
I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS ABOUT HOW THE NEW SIGNAGE MIGHT INTERACT, INTERACT WITH THE EXISTING SIGNAGE, OR IF THERE'S A PLAN TO, UH, REMOVE SOME OF THE EXISTING SIGNAGE.
[00:15:01]
THERE ARE, UM, THIS WOULD BE A THIRD SIGNAGE.UM, THERE, THERE IS ONE EXISTING ONE.
THERE WAS A DONATION FOR THE CLASS OF 1994, I BELIEVE, AND THE DISTRICT WISHED TO KEEP THAT ONE AS HONOR THE DONATION.
UM, AND THERE IS AN EXISTING MARQUEE THAT IS ON ALONG ST.
WHAT WE ARE REQUESTING AT THIS TIME IS TO THE APPROVAL OF THE NEW SITE SIGNAGE OF THE MAIN BUILDING AS WE GO THROUGH THE NEW, UM, ENTIRE RENOVATION OF THE PROJECTS AND WE IDENTIFYING THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING.
I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS READ TWO STAFF STIPULATIONS, WHICH INCLUDES REMOVAL OF THE DIGITAL COMPONENT.
UM, I KNOW THAT WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS ADDRESSED BY THE, THE COMMENTS, AND SO I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY THAT THAT HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM THE REQUEST.
UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AGAIN.
SO THE, THE ELEVATED SIGN ALONG THE ROCK WALL THAT THE MARQUEE, THAT'S JUST GONNA BE A, A DOUBLE-SIDED LETTER MARQUEE, IS THAT CORRECT? THE MARQUEE ON ON THE ST.
MARY'S OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE NO, THE NEW THE THE NEW ONE.
THE NEW ONE IS JUST IT, UM, THE LETTER IS JUST ONE SIDE.
IT'S JUST FOR THE PARKING TO THE, TOWARDS THE PARKING LOT AS PEOPLE ENTER THE, UM, THE, THE PARKING, THE BUILDING, IT'S JUST FACING THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING.
IT'S, IT, THERE ARE ALUMINUM, UM, LETTERS PLACED IN PERFORATED METAL AND OVER A A, A PHASE OF, UM, CAPSTONE.
UM, SO THE APPLICANT IS AWARE THAT THE DIGITAL MARQUEE SIGNAGE IS PROHIBITED.
SO ANYTHING THAT WILL FILL THAT SPACE WILL COME BACK FOR REVIEW FROM OUR OFFICE TO MAKE SURE IT COMPLIES WITH OUR GUIDELINES.
UM, THE ONE THAT RA IS SPEAKING TO IS THE ONE ON THE EXISTING LIMESTONE WALL.
AND TO ADDRESS, UM, KING WILLIAMS COMMENTS ABOUT THAT BEING A NEW LIMESTONE WALL, WE REFER TO IT AS EXISTING BECAUSE IT IS THERE NOW, IT'S ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED.
SO THAT SIGNAGE WILL BE A TOP THAT LIMESTONE WALL.
I I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
W WAS THAT I IS THE INTENT OF THE DIGITAL ASPECT FOR INFORMATION TO STUDENTS.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERING THAT THIS IS A COMPLETELY REVAMPING OF THIS SCHOOL, I MEAN IT'S IT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT SCHOOL.
UM, IF, IF IT IS, WHY, WHY HASN'T IT BEEN SEEN AS CRITICAL TO THE, TO THE FUNCTIONAL, YOU KNOW, UH, OPERATING OF A, MAXIMIZING THE SCHOOL'S, UH, UH, NEED TO COMMUNICATE TO THEIR STUDENTS? YEAH, I'LL ANSWER HALF OF THAT QUESTION AND THEN I'LL DEFER TO THE APPLICANT TO SORT OF, UH, RESPOND TO WHAT THE, THE NEED FOR THE SIGNAGE SIGNAGES.
UM, BUT THE REASON FOR THE PRO PROHIBITION LANGUAGE IS THAT THIS IS UNDER REVIEW BECAUSE IT'S IN THE RIO OVER RIVER, OVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT OR RIO.
UM, AND SO THERE'S ACTUAL PROHIBITION LANGUAGE FOR ANY TYPE OF DIGITAL SIGN, AND THAT INCLUDES MESHES BOARDS REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE, THE CONTENT OF THAT MESSAGE IS.
UM, AND SO IT'S, IT IS A CODE PROHIBITION, WHICH MEANS IT'S DIFFICULT TO GET AROUND.
UH, WE AS STAFF ARE NOT EVEN ABLE TO REFER A PROHIBITED ITEM TO THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION.
UM, AND SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THAT RECOMMENDATION.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AGAIN, TO BE, TO BE CLEAR, WHERE THE, I THINK THE, THE SIGNAGE, THE NEW SIGNAGE THAT'S PROPOSED IS APPROPRIATELY LOCATED, UM, AT THIS, UH, KIND OF REVAMPED ENTRANCE THAT FACES THE NORTHEAST.
UM, UH, I DON'T OBJECT, UH, TO THE PROPOSAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
I WOULDN'T SUPPORT, UH, THE DIGITAL SIGN AND, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO THAT.
UH, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO LOOK AT THE, THE OVERALL SIGNAGE AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES TO THOSE, UH, TO CONSIDER THE TOTAL SIGNAGE ACROSS THE, THE CAMPUS.
I THINK THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT'S PROPOSED IS APPROPRIATE GIVEN THE SCALE OF THE BUILDINGS AND THE SIZE OF THE CAMPUS.
SO I MOVE TO APPROVE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
UM, WE, WE WERE WAITING ON, ON THE APPLICANT TO, UH, GIVE THE B OH, I'M SORRY.
I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE WAITING FOR THEM TO, WERE YOU WAITING FOR A, A QUESTION ABOUT THE DIGITAL, THE, IF THE APPLICANT COULD SORT OF DESCRIBE, UM, THE TYPE OF MESSAGING THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DISPLAY ON THE SIGN.
THE, OH, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY ALL WE ARE REQUESTING RIGHT NOW, IT'S THE MAIN BUILDING SITE SIGNAGE.
UM, I THINK THAT A LOT OF THE CONFUSION IS THE, THE EXISTING MARQUE, WHICH,
[00:20:01]
UM, THE DISTRICT WILL MAY HAVE CONSIDERED TO HAVE A DIGITAL, BUT IF WOULD EVER HAPPENED, AS OF NOW, I HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT.WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY DIRECTION FROM THE DISTRICT REGARDING THE MARQUEE ON THE DIGITAL MARQUEE, UM, SEATED ON ST.
UM, WE ARE REQUESTED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS MOMENT TO JUST THE NEW SITE, UH, SIGNAGE AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE MAIN BUILDING.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT PERHAPS HAVE A PLAN, A MASTER PLAN OF THE SIGNAGE.
WE CAN CERTAINLY SIT DOWN, BUT THE DISTRICT CAN ADDRESS THAT.
BUT THE, THE PERMITS WE NEVER ADDRESS THE OTHER ONES BECAUSE WE'RE SPECIFICALLY ASKING FOR THE ONES FOR THE MAIN ENTRANCE AS IS THE MAIN, UH, IT'S ENTIRELY NEW ENTRANCE, NEW RENOVATION, NEW ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING.
AND WE CAN ADDRESS, IF IT'S A DISTRICT WISH TO CHANGE THE EXISTING MARQUE, THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE, UM, REQUEST FOR FOR REVIEW.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE FISH? AYE.
[20-3779 Address/Description: 418 BARRERA HDRC Case No.: 2020-230 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Thomas Stamp/Currahee Property Solutions LLC Request: Construction of four, multi-story residential structures City Council Dist.: 1 ]
OUR INDIVIDUAL AGENDA.SO ITEM 14, EDWARD, CAN YOU READ THAT INTO THE RECORD? OKAY.
EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I AM.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THE CASE IN AGENDA.
ITEM NUMBER 14, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 34 18 BARRERA, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT FOUR MULTI RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE VACANT LOT AT FOUR 18 RERA LOCATED WITHIN THE LAVACCA HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THIS LOT IS CURRENTLY SUBDIVIDED INTO FOUR SEPARATE PARCELS.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL AT THIS TIME BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH SS STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS PRIOR TO RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
ONE THAT A STEP BACK THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES BE USED FOR THE STREET FACING STRUCTURE IS NOTED IN FINDING D TWO THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL ENTRANCE ELEMENTS ON THE STREET FACING FACADE SUCH AS TRADITIONAL PORCH ELEMENTS AS NOTED IN FINDINGS D AND E THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT ELIMINATE THE THIRD STORY MASSING AS NOTED IN FINDING F FOUR THAT THE APPLICANT ELIMINATE THE PROPOSED GABLE RETURNS AS NOTED IN FINDING H FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED A LOT COVERAGE THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AS NOTED IN FINDING I SIX.
THAT STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFS FEATURE PANELS THAT ARE 18 TO 21 INCHES WIDE.
SEAMS THAT ARE ONE TO TWO INCHES IN HEIGHT, A STANDARD GAL BALLOON FINISH AND A CRIMPED RIDGE SEAM OR LOW PROFILE RIDGE CAP.
IF A RIDGE CAP IS PROPOSED, IT SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
ADDITIONALLY, STAFF FINDS AT ALL SIDINGS SHOULD FEATURE AN EXPOSURE FOUR INCHES OR LESS.
SMOOTH FINISHES A THICKNESS OF THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH IN LIGHTER CORNERS.
SEVEN, THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATE WINDOWS THAT MEET STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
WINDOWS IN NEW CONSTRUCTION IS NOTED IN FINDING K EIGHT THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED A DRIVEWAY WITH THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES NOTED IN FINDING N NINE THAT THE APPLICANT ELIMINATE THE FRONT YARD PARKING IS NOTED IN FINDING P AND ELIMINATE PARKING WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION IS NOTED IN FINDING O INTEND THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED A FRONT YARD WALKWAY AND SUBMIT A DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN IS NOTED IN FINDINGS Q AND R.
UH, THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL STIPULATION THAT I MISSED THAT'S 11, THAT ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT BE SCREENED FROM VIEW FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IS NOTED IN FINDING SS.
I HAVE THE APPLICANT TOM STAMP ON THE LINE NOW.
A GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE TIME TO TALK TO YOU THIS AFTERNOON.
UH, SO FOUR 18 RERA STREET IS, UM, A UNIQUE PROPERTY WITHIN THE LE UH, LEICA HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UH, YOU KNOW, OUR INTENT IS TO, UH, TAKE THIS PROPERTY, WHICH, UH, AS YOU SEE IT HAS FOUR LOTS.
UM, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE
[00:25:01]
NORM THERE WITHIN LACA, BUT WHAT WE WANNA DO IS TAKE YOU TO THOSE LOTS THAT IS, UH, PART OF THIS BIGGER, UH, PROPERTY AND, UH, MAKE IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT AND USE AND CHARACTER.UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO DO THAT WITH THESE FOUR LOTS, THE WAY THEY'RE ALIGNED, UH, MOVING AWAY FROM THE STREET AND, UH, BEING, BEING SET UP, UH, SO CLOSE TOGETHER.
UM, BUT WHAT WE'VE DONE TOGETHER, UH, WITH OUR DESIGN IS NOT ENTIRELY, UH, DIFFERENT FROM SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON AROUND US, BUT I BELIEVE YOU'VE SEEN, UH, IN THE INFORMATION PACKET THAT, UH, YOU'VE BEEN PROVIDED.
THERE ARE SEVERAL PROPERTIES, UH, ON BOTH SIDES OF THE, UH, UH, FOUR A TIMBER RERA THAT ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, THREE STORY IN NATURE AND, UH, DOING SOME OF THE SIMILAR THINGS.
NOW, OUR ORIGINAL DESIGN, UH, THAT WE CAME TO HAVE, UH, REVIEWED, UM, WE'VE BEEN TO THE D R C SEVERAL TIMES NOW AND HAVE BEEN, UH, VERY WILLING TO, UH, INCORPORATE ALL THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS INTO, UH, COMING UP WITH A PLAN THAT YOU SEE RIGHT NOW.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO JAM THE SQUARE PEG INTO A ROUND HOLE HERE.
WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO, UH, DO SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA COMPLIMENT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AS A WHOLE, UH, DORA STREET ITSELF, UH, IT'S FAMILIAR WITH THE LOCATION SITS, UH, RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF, UH, THE CONTEMPORARY PORTION OF, UM, UH, THE LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, VERY CONTEMPORARY LOOKING HOMES GOING UP INTO THAT AREA, UH, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO US, UH, WITH A VERY LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE STREET.
UM, SOME SORT OF COMMERCIAL, UH, SCHOOL BUILDING, UM, JUST, UH, TWO DOORS DOWN AND, UH, YOU KNOW, A CITY OFFICE BUILDING ACROSS THE ROAD, UH, WITH ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX AS WELL.
SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS, UH, WE'VE PUT TOGETHER A, UH, DESIGN THAT, UH, USING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF OF THE D R C, UM, HAS, UH, UH, ALLOWED US TO PUT THAT BASICALLY KINDA LIKE A TWO AND A HALF STORY PLAN TOGETHER TO MAXIMIZE THE SPACE.
IT'S, UH, COMPARABLE IN, IN HEIGHT TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
UH, THERE'S A THREE STORY PROPERTY BEING, UH, RENOVATED AND, AND CONSTRUCTED JUST NEXT DOOR TO IT.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, UH, TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, UH, THE NATURE, UH, THE, THE TIGHT NATURE OF THE LOTS AND DONE THE BEST THAT WE COULD WITH THE, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, ONE OF THE CONCERNS WAS THE LOT COVERAGE.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DONE THE BEST THAT WE CAN WITH THAT AFFORDING FOR, UH, THE SPACE BETWEEN AND BEHIND AND IN FRONT OF EACH OF THE, UH, THE UNITS AND, UM, ACCOMMODATING PARKING.
UH, ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WAS BROUGHT BY THE D R C, UH, THE COMMISSIONERS, THERE WAS THE, UH, FRONT UNIT CERTAINLY, UM, MAKING SURE THAT THE, UH, UH, ELEVATION THERE FACING THE STREET IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH, UH, THE, UH, PROPERTIES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
UH, SO THAT THE, UH, UNIT FACING STREET, WHICH YOU'RE SEEING THERE IS BUILDING A, UM, LOOKS MORE LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW, THOSE IN THE AREA.
IT'S ONLY TWO STORIES HIGH AND IT HAS THAT FRONT ENTRY AND PORCH KIND OF ENTRANCE, UH, THAT WOULD FACE THE STREET AND MAKE IT LOOK, UH, YOU KNOW, MORE REPRESENTATIVE OF WHAT'S IMMEDIATELY THERE IN THE AREA.
UM, ON THE LINE WITH ME, UH, I FORGOT TO MENTION, I HAVE MY, UH, GENERAL CONTRACTOR RUSTY AND THE, UH, DESIGNER, THE ARCHITECT, UH, BRENDA, WHO PUT THESE PLANS TOGETHER FOR US.
SO, UH, BRENDA, CERTAINLY THE EXPERT AS FAR AS TALKING ABOUT ANY OF THE, UH, DESIGN FEATURES THAT YOU MAY HAVE CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT AS WELL AS THE MATERIALS.
UM, AS FAR AS THOSE, UH, ARE CONCERNED, UM, WE SEE THE O H P GUIDELINE, UH, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
UH, WE, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THOSE ASIDE FROM THE, UH, THAT TWO AND A HALF, UH, STORY LITTLE, UH, TURRET THAT'S STICKING UP THERE FOR THE, UH, THIRD, YOU KNOW, THE ROOF TERRACE.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE GOT POSITIVE FEEDBACK WITH THAT, WITH THE, UH, D R C AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT MATERIALS AND WINDOWS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THAT WE HAVE, UH, NO ISSUES INCORPORATING INTO THE PLAN.
UM, SO I, I DON'T WANNA, UH, SPEND ALL THE TIME HERE TALKING TO MYSELF.
I WANNA, UH, TURN THIS OVER TO YOU FOR SIR, UH, FOR SURE.
SO THAT, UH, IF ANYBODY HAS ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, YOU HAVE TIME TO, UH, DIRECT THOSE TO US AND WE CAN TRY AND GET THOSE RESOLVED.
DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS? WE DO.
SO THIS COMES FROM, WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
I'M GONNA READ THOSE AT THIS TIME.
THERE'S JUST ONE LETTER FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, THEY CONCUR WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO DENY CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR FOUR 18 RERA.
THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR MULTI-STORY RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THIS PARCEL IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE HISTORIC BUILDING THAT CITY PATTERNS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
[00:30:01]
BY THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION EXCEEDS 50%, WHICH DOES NOT MEET GUIDELINES.THE OVERALL MASSING OF THE FOUR UNITS IS ALSO INCONSISTENT WITH THE SCALE OF THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THAT'S ALL WE HAVE FOR THIS ITEM.
AND DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? THIS IS NOT CONCEPTUAL, THIS IS FINAL CORRECTLY? THAT IS CORRECT.
THE APPLICATION IS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
WHO IS THIS? HEY, UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU.
WHO IS THIS? YEAH, UM, I'M SORRY.
I NEED TO, UM, THIS IS NOT THE MOST RECENT PLANS WHERE, UH, UM, I'M SEEING THERE AND I'M SORRY ABOUT THIS.
WE MADE THE CH THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES THAT WE HAD IN THE LAST D R C AND THESE ARE NOT THE PLANS.
I'M SORRY THAT I'M TELLING YOU RIGHT NOW.
I'M LIKE, YOU ARE LOOKING AND I'M LIKE, THOSE ARE NOT THE PLANS.
CAN, CAN I JUST ASK FOR YOU TO SAY YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE? CAN YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF PLEASE? I'M SORRY, BRENDA.
UM, THIS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, UH, UH, I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CHAIR, UH, CHAIR.
IT'D BE VERY DIFFICULT TO HAVE A, ANY, UH, CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS PROJECT WITHOUT HAVING A PROPER SET OF PLANS.
UH, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'D BE INTERESTED IN TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION, MAYBE A CONTINUANCE OR, UM, UH, FROM AS STAFF, I CAN, THESE ARE, SO THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE'RE REVIEWING NOW ARE THE ONES THAT STAFF WROTE OUR RECOMMENDATION BASED ON, UM, IT WAS ALSO COMMUNICATED TO THE APPLICANT, UM, THAT UPDATES WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BE BROUGHT IN INTO THE HEARING.
UM, SO THIS MAY HAVE POTENTIALLY BEEN SUBMITTED, UM, AFTER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, OR THERE COULD HAVE BEEN AN UPDATE SUBMITTED AFTER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS FINALIZED.
UM, BUT EDWARD, DID WE RECEIVE ANY UPDATED DRAWINGS? COMMISSIONER, THIS IS COMMISSIONER GRU AND, UM, I THINK WE'VE BEEN VERY GOOD WITH ALL APPLICANTS THAT WE CAN'T ACCEPT, UH, YOU KNOW, LATE, UH, I, I KIND OF, I'M A LITTLE BIT WORRIED ABOUT WHAT'S THE APPLICANT SAYING ABOUT, UH, D R C.
SO I WOULD ACTUALLY, I MEAN, I DO THINK THAT THIS APPLICATION HAS A LOT OF STIPULATIONS THAT I AGREE WITH TOO MANY FOR ME TO EVEN APPROVE WITH THAT MANY STIPULATIONS.
IT IS, UH, KIND OF A COMPLEX CASE BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION OF THE LAW AND WHERE IT'S AT AND, AND HOW RIGHT NOW IT'S BEING PRESENTED TO US.
UM, THERE MAY BE REVISED PLANS, BUT IS THERE ANYBODY THAT CAN REPORT BACK FROM THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
I'M HAPPY TO GIVE A REPORT FROM, UH, THE LAST D R C THAT WE HAD ABOUT THIS, AND I THINK THERE WAS A THUNDERSTORM ROLLING IN.
IT MAY HAVE GOT CUT A LITTLE BIT SHORT BEFORE WE TALKED ABOUT THE FRONT YARD ELEMENTS.
UM, AND I'M GONNA TRY TO MAKE A RE I'M GONNA TRY TO REPORT ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED AS IT'S KIND OF OUTLINED IN THE STIPULATIONS HERE.
UM, I THINK I HEARD, UH, THE APPLICANT SAY THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH MOST OF THE STIPULATIONS RELATIONS ARE KIND OF GENERAL AND, UH, RELATED TO MAYBE THE DRAWINGS.
UM, THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE IS SUCH THAT THERE WERE, IT'S A VERY UNUSUAL SITE THAT THERE, IT WAS, UH, BROKEN UP THIS WAY AND THERE WERE FOUR, UH, FOUR STRUCTURES PREVIOUSLY ON THE SITE.
I BELIEVE IN RELATIVELY SIMILAR CONFIGURATION, UH, AS THIS, UH, AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE IMAGE THERE ON THE BOTTOM THAT IT'S KIND OF ON A CORNER.
SO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK ISN'T AS, AS CLEAR TO UNDERSTAND, UH, IN THIS AN APPROPRIATE FRONT YARD SETBACK ISN'T AS CLEAR TO UNDERSTAND IN THIS CASE AS IT IS SOME, I BELIEVE WE ASKED FOR THEM TO SHOW THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ADJACENT BUILDINGS ON, ON THE SITE PLAN, WHICH I DON'T, DON'T SEE HERE.
AND I THINK, UH, STAFF'S COMMENTS, UH, ARE REALLY ABOUT THAT.
UM, C COMMISSIONER FISH, THIS IS, UH, OR MR. CHAIR, THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ.
IF THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY TOLD US THAT, THAT THEY HAVE UPDATED DRAWINGS, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WE, THAT YOU'RE GONNA EXPLAIN, BUT IT'S STILL NOT GONNA BE ACCURATE WITH WHATEVER DRAWINGS THEY'RE BRINGING US.
IT IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO CONTINUE IT.
I, THAT THAT'S AN OPINION, BUT I WHAT YOU'RE SAYING COMPARED TO WHAT THE APPLICANT'S ALREADY TOLD US, I MEAN, WELL, COMMISSIONER, I MEAN, WE HAVE, WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF DRCS ON THE CASE AND, AND, UH, THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR REPORT.
I, I UNDERSTAND, I, I UNDERSTAND.
I THINK IT'S REASONABLE, UM, TO REPORT ON THE ISSUES THAT WERE DISCUSSED IN THE D R
[00:35:01]
C AND IF THE APPLICANT CAN GLEAN ANYTHING FROM THAT DISCUSSION, UM, GOING FORWARD, IT MIGHT BE VALUABLE TO THEM.UM, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT IT'S, UH, VERY UNLIKELY WE CAN TAKE ANY ACTION ON THIS TODAY.
I DON'T KNOW, MR. CHAIRMAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY, ANY SUGGESTION ON HOW TO PROCEED? MR. FISHER WANTED THE REPORT FOR IT TO BE ON THE RECORD CORRECTLY, EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T TAKE ACTION.
I WANTED THE REPORT TO BE ON RECORD.
I WOULD PROCEED WITH THE REPORT AND THEN, UH, I'D PROBABLY SUPPORT A CONTINUANCE, BUT LET'S GET THE REPORT.
I DON'T THINK WE'VE GOT A, A SPECIFIC NUMBER ON LOT COVERAGE AND WE REQUESTED THAT, UM, THE GUIDELINES SUGGEST THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE OVER 50%.
HOWEVER, UH, GIVEN THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS SITE THERE, THERE WAS SOME CONSIDERATION, UH, FLEXIBILITY, BUT I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT NUMBER SPECIFICALLY.
UM, THE THIRD STORY ELEMENT OR, UH, VOL, THE VOLUME ON TOP DISCUSSED AT GREAT LENGTH.
UM, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AT LEAST BY ME ABOUT, UH, THE POSSIBILITY OF REDUCING THE APPARENT MASS OF THAT, UM, IN PROFILE WITH AN ALTERNATE ROOF.
BUT GENERALLY, UH, BECAUSE THE OVERALL HEIGHT INCLUDING THAT, THAT SMALL THIRD STORY ELEMENT, WHICH IS ONLY A LANDING TO ROOF ACCESS, THERE'S NO ROOM UP THERE.
UM, THERE WASN'T MUCH CONSTERNATION ABOUT IT FROM THE, THE D R C, UM, AS A, AS A THIRD STORY ELEMENT.
UM, AND THE OVERALL HEIGHT WAS DEMONSTRATED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE ADJACENT, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION TO THE WEST AND TO THE EAST.
AND THERE WAS ALSO SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, UH, MATERIAL CHANGES WHICH HAVE, ARE NOT REPRESENTED IN THIS SET.
AND I THINK, UH, UH, I DON'T REMEMBER WHO ELSE WAS IN THAT D R C, BUT PLEASE, UH, FEEL, FEEL FREE TO AMEND OR ADD TO ANY OF MY COMMENTS.
CHAIRMAN, THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UM, YOU KNOW, I CONCUR WITH, UH, THE RECOUNTING OF COMMISSIONER FISH OF THE D R C AND, AND I THINK, UH, TO FOLLOW UP JUST ON THE FINISHES, I THINK THERE WAS A, AN APPEAL TO SORT OF SIMPLIFY AND USE, UH, PERHAPS A, A, UH, MORE CONSOLIDATED PALETTE OF MATERIALS.
SAY STAY WITH THE, WITH THE SIDING RATHER THAN INTRODUCE, UH, THE STUCCO ELEMENTS THAT SOME OF THEM DON'T QUITE MAKE SENSE.
WHERE THERE ARE GABLE FACES THAT ARE SPLIT WITH SIDING AND, AND UH, STUCCO.
AND SO, UM, I THINK THERE WAS ALSO, UH, YOU KNOW, AN UNDERSTANDING FROM THE APPLICANT OF, OF, OF KIND SOME OF THE, UH, THE POSSIBILITIES OF STAYING WITH SOME OF THE MAY, MAYBE KIND OF LIKE THE CEMENT SIDING TYPE OF MATERIALS THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF VARIETIES OF, OF, UH, BOARD AND BATTEN AND, AND SHINGLES AND SOME OTHER MATERIALS AND KIND CAN SIMPLIFY THAT BALLOT.
BUT, UM, I WAS DISAPPOINTED WHEN I SAW THE PACKAGE 'CAUSE I DIDN'T SEE ANY OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED.
AND SO, UM, I'M ENCOURAGED TO HEAR THAT YES, CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE AND I CONCUR WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ THAT UH, WE SHOULD CONTINUE THIS CASE UNTIL THEY CAN PREVENT PRESENT THEIR FINAL DRAWINGS TO US.
SO I MOVE FOR A CONTINUANCE OF THE PROJECT.
I SECOND, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE.
UM, NEXT IS ITEM 15 21, 58 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY.
WE, HE WAS HAVING DIFFICULTY CONTACTING THE APPLICANT TO SEE IF HE'S, HE'S READY.
SO, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, STILL HASN'T PICKED UP, SO, UH, JOHN SPIEGEL OR JOE HAZELWOOD, IF YOU'RE, UH, WATCHING THIS LIVE STREAM, PLEASE UH, REACH OUT TO ME VIA TEXT OR EMAIL AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET YOU ON BEFORE THE HEARING CONCLUDES.
ALL RIGHT, WELL LET'S JUST PUT A PIN IN THAT ONE.
UM, EDWARD, ARE YOU READY? WE'RE MUTED.
EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE WITHOUT JUST BEING THAT UNMUTED? CORRECT.
[00:40:02]
YES, I'M HERE[20-3783 Address/Description: 819 LAMAR ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-001 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Michael Cisneros/Harmony Custom Homes Request: Construction of a 2-story residential structure City Council Dist.: 2 ]
AND I ACTUALLY HAVE THE APPLICANT FOR EIGHT 19 LAMAR ON THE LINE.UM, SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THAT INTO THE RECORD AND BEGIN WITH THAT, WITH THAT ITEM.
UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 16 H D R C CASE NUMBER 2 2 0 0 1 8 1 9.
LAMAR, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON THE VACANT LOT AT EIGHT 19.
LAMAR LOCATED WITHIN THE DIG WITTY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.
BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH Q STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO A RECOMMENDATION FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION NOTING THAT THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL FEATURE A SETBACK THAT IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY.
ON THE BLOCK IS NOTED IN FINDING D TWO THAT THE APPLICANT MODIFIED THE PROPOSED MASSING, SPECIFICALLY THAT WHICH RELATES TO THE REAR ROOF'S PROFILE AND MASSING AS NOTED IN FINDING H, EXCUSE ME, FINDINGS F AND H THREE, THAT ALL COMPOSITE SIDING FEATURING EXPOSURE OF FOUR INCHES.
THE SMOOTH FINISH A THICKNESS OF APPROXIMATELY THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH IN LIGHTER CORNERS.
ADDITIONALLY, COMPOSITE TRIM FASCIA BOARD AND SOFFIT SHOULD FEATURE SMOOTH FINISHES OR THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALL WINDOWS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS FOR WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION.
REFERENCING THE APPLICABLE CITATIONS AS NOTED IN FINDING K FIVE, THE TRADITIONAL WINDOW SIZES BE USED AND THAT ADDITIONAL WINDOWS SHOULD BE INCORPORATED ON THE SIDE FACADE TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF UNINTERRUPTED WALL PLANES.
AS NOTED IN FINDING L SIX, THAT PORCH AND COLUMN CONFIGURATION THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY IN THE DISTRICT, SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO DOUBLE HEIGHT PORCHES THREE CAN USE IS NOTED IN FINDING M SEVEN THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT A DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT NOTES THE LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF LANDSCAPING MATERIALS AND IT NOTES THE SCREENING OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT.
UM, THERE'S ALSO TWO NOTES BELOW IN REGARDS TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION AND THE STANDING SCENE ROOF INSPECTION.
HOWEVER, THIS IS FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL.
UH, MR. CISNEROS, UH, YOU CAN NOW JUMP RIGHT INTO YOUR PRESENTATION.
UM, HELLO, I, UM, MY, MY NAME IS MIKE CNIS, BY THE WAY.
I'M WITH, UH, HARMONY CUSTOM HOMES AND I HAVE, UM, THIS PARTICULAR HOME, UM, UM, GOING TO TRY TO CONSTRUCT THIS HOME FOR, UH, UH, AN INVESTOR HERE IN SAN ANTONIO.
UM, AND, UM, I I, I'VE BEEN IN CONSTRUCTION FOR HOME BUILDING FOR 30 YEARS, BUT I'VE NEVER BUILT IN, UH, THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT.
SO JUST BEAR WITH ME ON THIS, ON THIS, UH, DESIGN.
THIS IS MY FIRST STAB AT IT, SO BEAR WITH ME HERE.
UM, I, I GUESS WHAT, WHAT I, UM, IN GOING THROUGH THE FINDINGS AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE, WERE ON THERE ARE KIND OF, KIND OF NEW TO ME JUST BECAUSE, UM, AGAIN, NOT BUILDING IN THIS AREA AND NOT UNDERSTANDING ALL THE, UM, THE, UM, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE, THAT THE COMMISSION IS REQUIRING US TO DO.
UM, AND I DEFINITELY WANNA FOLLOW ALL THE DESIGN, UH, GUIDELINES THAT ARE REQUIRED.
UM, SO I JUST KIND OF NEED A LITTLE BIT OF A, SOME GUIDANCE ON, ON TRYING TO GO THAT DIRECTION.
SEEMS LIKE, UM, AND THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL DRAWING.
OUR REASONING FOR THE TWO STORY WAS, UM, TO NOT, UM, COVER, I THINK IT IN ONE OF THE AREAS IT TALKS ABOUT MORE THAN 50% OF THE LOT.
UM, THE OTHER, THE OTHER THING WAS TO, UH, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, ET CETERA.
UM, WE TRIED TO MAINTAIN THE SETBACKS ACCORDING TO WHAT WAS, UM, EXISTING OUT THERE NOW.
UM, AND I WAS TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM NOT DOING JUST A NORMAL TWO STORY BOX HOUSE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE KIND OF, WE, WE KIND OF JUST PUT A PORTION OF THE UPSTAIRS ON ONE, ON THE FRONT, ON THE FURTHEST FRONT PART OF PART, PART OF THE HELM.
UM, AND, UM, AND THEN THE, UM, THE OWNER HAD ALSO TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO DO A, UH, A BALCONY, UH, TERRACE KIND OF EFFECT.
UM, STILL TRYING TO MAINTAIN MAYBE DO, UM, THE CRAFTSMAN LOOK.
UM, BUT, BUT WE'RE OPEN TO ANY CHANGES.
UM, I'D HATE TO CHANGE THE FLOOR PLAN DESIGN, UM, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, I AM ALSO A REALTOR AND, UH, AND LOOKING AT THE COMPS THAT ARE OUT THERE, UM, AND WHAT THE, WHAT THE HOMES ARE SELLING FOR AND, AND SOME OF THE OTHER, UM, NEIGHBORHOODS, I MEAN WITHIN THE DIGNITY AREA.
UM, SOME HAVE BEEN SOME NICE, UH, BEAUTIFUL TWO STORY HOMES, UM, FAIRLY NEW AS WELL.
UM, AND, AND THAT'S REALLY, REALLY ALL I I CAN ADD TO, TO MY PRESENTATION.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF MAYBE Y'ALL CAN KIND OF GIVE ME SOME FEEDBACK AND, AND WHAT I CAN, UH, DO TO MAYBE, UM, ALTER
[00:45:01]
THIS DESIGN, UM, AND, AND MOVE FORWARD.UH, I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, THE FIRST COMES FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, THE SOCIETY CONCURS WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DENIAL OF CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL.
THE PROPOSED SCALE OF THE REAR ROOF FORM, THE PROPOSED ADMINISTRATION PATTERN, THE PROPOSED ROOF DETAILING ARE NOT, EXCUSE ME, A PROPOSED PORCH DETAILING ARE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THIS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE NEXT LETTER COMES FROM SCOTT ALBERT ON BEHALF OF SEVERAL NEIGHBORS, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE SUPPORT O H P TO DENY CONCEPTUAL AT THIS TIME, ESPECIALLY IN REGARDS TO MASSING FORMS AND ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS.
THE CONTEXT AREA FOR THIS PROJECT IS COMPRISED PRIMARILY OF SINGLE STORIES, HISTORIC HOUSES, THE SIMILAR PROPORTIONS OF MASSING.
EVEN THE ONE TWO STORY HOUSE ON THE BLOCK HAS MODEST WIDTH, HEIGHT AND ARCHITECTURALS DETAILS.
WE DID NOT SUPPORT PARKING AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AS JUST TO BE PLACED ALONGSIDE INTO THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.
THE SOUTH FACE OF LAMAR HAS A COUPLE PROPERTIES WITH FRONT CAR PARKS BECAUSE AT ONE TIME THE REAR ALLEY WAS OPEN FOR PROPERTY ACCESS AND IS NOW CLOSED OFF FOR SOME LOTS.
THE NORTH SIDE OF LAMAR'S AT ACCESS HAS ALWAYS BEEN FROM THE FRONT OF THE LOTS, THEREFORE, ALL BUT ONE PROPERTY HAVE SIDE TO REAR PROPERTY PARKING.
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP.
HAS THIS BEEN TO A D R C? NO, THIS HAS NOT, UH, BEEN TO THE HONOR REVIEW COMMITTEE, SO I, I REALLY WANNA ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT AND I MAY ACTUALLY ALREADY DO A MOTION.
I MEAN, IT IS, UH, IT IS FAIR ENOUGH.
I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE THE APPLICANT MAYBE JUST BE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS AND NEED SOME GUIDANCE, WHICH I THINK IN THIS MEETING, UH, WOULD NOT BE AS
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING IS AN INFORMAL, BUT WE CAN GO A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DETAILS OF, OF WHY THOSE STIPULATIONS BY STAFF AND WHAT THAT DENIAL.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF POSSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROPERTY AND I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT, UH, REALLY COULD WORK WITH US AND I THINK WE COULD BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE A SOLUTION FOR THIS.
SO I'LL MOVE A MOTION TO MOVE TO D R C, THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO SEND THIS TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
UM, YES, AND I DO WANT TO QUICKLY POINT OUT THAT WE'VE BEEN JOINED BY COMMISSIONER AREOLA FERNANDEZ.
BOWMAN, I THINK HE STEPPED UP.
[20-3759 Address/Description: 2158 W KINGS HWY HDRC Case No.: 2020-251 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: John Speegle/speegle & KIM-davis Architecture Request: Enclosure of front porch with windows and door City Council Dist.: 7 ]
THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE FOR ITEM 15.UM, IF WE CAN UN UNMUTE, WE SHOULD BE READY TO GO.
I'M AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 15, CASE NUMBER 20 22 51 AT 2158 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ENCLOSE THE FRONT PORCH TO FEATURE ALUMINUM WINDOWS IN THE TWO FRONT ARCHES AND DOORS IN THE SIDE FACING ARCHES.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDING C THE APPLICANT SHOULD PERFORM IN-KIND RECONSTRUCTION AS ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED FOR CASE CONTEXT.
UH, THIS PROPERTY, UH, CONDUCTED THE WORK PRIOR TO APPROVAL AND WAS REFERRED TO A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING, UH, AT THE LAST HEARING.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS ATTENDED TWO UH, D R C MEETINGS AND HAS REVISED THE PLANS.
THAT IS, UH, UH, AVAILABLE ON PAGE 11 OF THE PRESENTATION PACKET.
UH, JOHN SPIEGEL IS ON THE LINE, AND JOHN, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
UM, GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY IN THE MEETING THERE.
I'M, I'M JOHN SPIEGEL WITH S SPIEGEL AND KIM DAVIS ARCHITECTURE.
I'VE BEEN PRACTICING ARCHITECTURE SINCE 1980 AND I'VE TRIED TO SPECIFY, SPECIFY, SPECIALIZE IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND RENOVATION PROJECTS.
THIS PROJECT CAME TO ME WHEN THE H D R C CAME IN AND PUT A STOP WORK TO THE PROJECT AND TO BRIEFLY DECO TO DESCRIBE THE PROJECT.
THE LEFT HAND OF THE CITY DIDN'T KNOW THAT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE CLIENT THOUGHT THEY UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS REQUIRED OF THAT.
THE CLIENT DIDN'T KNOW THERE WERE GUIDELINES TO LEAD HIM THROUGH THIS PROJECT PROCESS OF RESTORING THE PORCH.
THE DAMAGE OF THE PORCH HAPPENED WHEN A THUNDERSTORM CAME
[00:50:01]
AND A BIG TREE ON THEIR FRONT PORCH SWUNG OVER AND DAMAGED THE PORCH GAVE A BIG WHACK TO THAT RIGHT CORNER OF THE PORCH.SO THEY WENT TO THE CITY, THEY GOT PERMITS, THEY FOLLOWED THE INSPECTIONS.
THEY GOT AN ENGINEER STUDY THAT WAS REQUIRED.
THEY WERE REQUIRED TO PUT A FOUNDATION BEAM IN.
THEY WERE REQUIRED TO PUT A HEADER ACROSS THE FRONT.
THEY DECIDED TO ENCLOSE THE PORCH, AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE BRICK ON THE HOUSE NEEDED TO BE REMOVED BECAUSE OF THE BIG WHACKING TO THE HOUSE.
AND THEN THE HD H D R C SHOWED UP AND TOLD 'EM TO STOP THE CONSTRUCTION.
AND THAT'S WHEN THEY HIRED ME.
AND SO EMOTIONALLY, I REALIZED THAT THE ARCHES WEREN'T GONNA WORK WITH THE DESIGN THAT THEY HAD IN PLACE, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY HAD THE, THE TWO WINDOWS ARE IN PLACE AND THEY HAD THE TWO DOORS ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
UM, CAN YOU SHOW THE FLOOR PLAN OF THE, UH, HOUSE THERE? THAT IF YOU GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT, ARE YOU ABLE TO SHOW THE FLOOR PLAN LEAK? YES, JOHN.
THERE'S A, A SLIGHT DELAY, BUT IT'S, I KNOW
I'M TALKING AND I HEAR MYSELF IN THE BACKGROUND.
UM, JOHN, ACTUALLY, IF YOU CAN MUTE YOUR, YOUR LIVE STREAM THAT YOU'RE PLAYING IN THE BACKGROUND, AND THEN YOU'LL JUST HAVE AUDIO THROUGH THE PHONE.
AND IF YOU CAN, ARE YOU ABLE TO SHOW THE FLOOR PLAN? IT'S UP RIGHT NOW.
WELL, I CAN'T SEE IT ON MY, OKAY.
UM, WHEN, UH, UH, ACTUALLY I FORGOT WHERE MY, WHERE MY PRESENTATION WAS.
UH, WHEN, UH, WHEN THEY HIRED ME, THE, THE FLOOR PLAN, THE WINDOWS WERE FLUSH WITH THE WALL THERE.
AND ONE OF THE PRESENTATION IDEAS WAS THAT WE NEEDED TO RECESS THE WINDOWS IN THE WALL.
AND SO I CAME UP WITH THE LITTLE DETAIL THERE WHERE WE WOULD RECESS THE WINDOWS AND I WOULD PUT A TWO BY SIX AROUND THE INSIDE OF THE WINDOWS AND RECESS THE WALL BACK.
THERE'S ALSO GONNA BE A WIND MO, A WOOD MOLDING DETAIL THAT GOES ON THE OUTSIDE, WHICH WHEN YOU LOOK ON THE ELEVATION, YOU CAN SEE IT.
IT'S NOT REAL PROMINENT IN THE DESIGN.
IT'S PROMINENT IN THE DESIGN, BUT YOU JUST REALLY CAN'T TELL.
THERE'S A WOOD MOLDING DETAIL THERE.
BUT I WANTED TO CONTINUE THE TOOTER STYLE OF THE HOUSE, AND THAT'S WHERE WE NEEDED TO ADD THE BANDING AND THE QUARTER ROUND TREATMENT THAT YOU SEE.
AND WE NEED TO RECESS THE WINDOWS.
WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M PRESENTING IS A, A REALLY PRUDENT TUDOR STYLE DESIGN WITH THE EXISTING BRICK BELOW THE WINDOWS, AND WE'RE ADDING THE MATCHING STUCCO ABOVE THE BRICK AND THEN ADDING THE DARK WOOD BANDING.
UM, THAT'S BASICALLY MY PRESENTATION.
I, I KNOW THAT, UM, WHAT HAPPENED AGAIN IS THAT THE OWNER DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE CITY REQUIRED.
THEY, THEY WENT ALONG, THEY WERE DOING THE WORK, AND THEN THE CITY CAME IN AND TOLD 'EM TO STOP.
AND THEN THAT'S WHEN THEY, AND HAD DONE SO MUCH WORK.
AND THAT'S WHEN I GOT INVOLVED, AND THAT'S WHEN I REALIZED, WELL, HERE, I, I CAME IN WITH MY DESIGN OF HAVING THE, UH, THEY HAD THE WINDOWS THERE AND I TOLD 'EM THEY NEEDED TO RECESS THE WINDOWS, BUT I DON'T FEEL THE ARCHES WOULD BE PART OF THE DESIGN BECAUSE IT JUST DOESN'T, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE PUTTING THE ARCHES ABOVE A FLAT WINDOW.
AND, UM, IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST NOT APPROPRIATE DESIGN TO HAVE THE ARCHES WITH A FLAT WINDOW BELOW IT.
SO, UM, AND THEN WHEN I LOOKED AT THE REST OF THE HOUSE, THEY HAVE THESE BANDINGS, THESE BAND STUCCO BANDS THAT CROSSED THE TOP DOOR.
AND I TOLD 'EM THEY NEEDED TO PAINT THOSE BANDINGS, THOSE BANDS A DARK STUCCO COLOR, AND THEN THAT JUST PULLS IT ALL TOGETHER.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I, I GUESS THE THING IS, IS THAT THE CLIENT HAD MADE A MISTAKE AND THEY ADMITTED, BUT THEY GOT TO A POINT WHERE THEY, THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE DOING GOOD.
AND OF COURSE, THE CITY SAID, NO, IT WASN'T GOOD.
BUT THEN I'M TRYING TO COME IN AND SAY, WELL, HERE'S WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE, MAKE THE BEST OF EVERYTHING.
UM, THAT'S ABOUT, I GUESS WHAT I CAN JUST SAY IS THAT, UH, THE, THE DESIGN THAT I'VE APPROACHED WITH IS, IS A GOOD DESIGN.
THIS THIS IS A, IT'S IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT IT'S NOT A HISTORIC HOME.
IT ADDS, IT CONTRIBUTES TO THE DISTRICT, BUT IT'S NOT A REAL HISTORIC HOME IN THE SENSE IT DOESN'T, IT WASN'T DESIGNED BY A PROMINENT ARCHITECT.
IT, UH, ADDS TO THE FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT, UM, IT, IT JUST DOESN'T HAVE THE PROMINENCE THAT, THAT, UH, SOME OF THE OTHER HOMES MIGHT HAVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT THIS HOUSE IS JUST A NICE SIMPLE HOUSE.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GIVE THE DESIGN TO TAKE IT BACK TO.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT WAS A BIG, HUGE TREE THAT HIT THE HOUSE, CAUSED ALL THESE PROBLEMS, AND THEY'VE BEEN TRYING TO WORK, WORK THROUGH THIS AND, UH, LIKE I SAID, LEFT HAND OF THE CITY DIDN'T KNOW THE RIGHT HAND OF THE CLIENT.
SO I'M TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THIS DESIGN BY GIVING THEM WHAT I FEEL IS A NICE SIMPLE DESIGN.
[00:55:01]
OKAY.I BELIEVE WE HAVE, UM, PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THEN IF WE COULD GET A, UH, D R C REPORT.
UM, SO WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO, 1 0 17, WILLIAM.
UM, THEY CONCUR WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO DENY APPROVAL TO ENCLOSE THE FRONT PORCH AT 2158 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY.
THE FRONT PORCH WAS A PROMINENT ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE OF THIS TUTOR REVIVAL HOME AND SHOULD BE RECONSTRUCTED TO MATCH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN.
THIS DESIGN FEATURED SEGMENTED ARCHED FORMS, UM, WITH DEEP REVEALS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY LOST AND ALTERED BY THE CURRENT WORK SIGNIFICANTLY ALTERING THE LARGE POR A LARGE PORTION OF THE FRONT FACADE OF THIS HOME IN A MANNER NOT REFLECTIVE OF ITS HISTORIC CHARACTER.
THE IN-KIND PORT'S RECONSTRUCTION WAS GRANTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE HELD TO THE STIPULATIONS OF THIS APPROVAL.
COULD WE GET A D R C REPORT, PLEASE? YES.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
I ATTENDED THAT D R C MEETING.
AND, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO START OFF WITH IS UNDERSTANDING WHY THINGS GOT KIND OF OUTTA HAND ON THIS PROJECT.
WHERE, UM, THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY THE DAMAGE FROM THE BIG, UH, RED OAK TREE THAT, THAT STRUCK THE HOUSE.
AND, UM, REALLY I IMPACTED A LOT OF THE FRAMING ABOVE THE PORCH, BUT THERE SEEMED TO BE KIND OF A VERY, UM, IN INTRUSIVE APPROACH TO SOLVING THE PROBLEMS HERE, RATHER THAN KIND OF WORKING WITH, UH, THE 90% OF THE BRICK THAT WAS INTACT AND, AND, UH, TRYING TO, UH, FIND SOLUTIONS THAT WOULD, UH, RETAIN A VERY PROMINENT CHARACTER.
THE CHARACTERISTIC, UH, CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURE OF THE HOUSE WAS THAT PORCH.
UM, I'M PERSONALLY NOT, UH, OPPOSED TO THE IDEA OF INFILLING THE PORCH, BUT DOING IT IN A WAY THAT IS AT LEAST CONCEPTUALLY REVERSIBLE AND ONE THAT IS, UH, DONE WHERE IT'S, UH, IDENTIFIABLE THAT THAT, THAT IT WAS A PORCH.
AND ONE OF THE ELEMENTS THAT HAVE RESULTED OUT OF THIS, UH, THE, THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE IS THE INTRODUCTION OF A WATER TABLE USING THE, UH, SALVAGE BRICK AND CREATING A WATER TABLE THAT IS NOT CHARACTERISTIC OF ANY OF THE HOMES OF THIS PERIOD IN THAT, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, YOU HAVE TO GO ACROSS CANMAN BEFORE YOU BEGIN TO SEE SORT OF HORIZONTAL, UM, WATER TABLE TYPE FE FEATURES.
AND, UH, SO I MADE THE SUGGESTION OF, OF SAYING, WELL, MAYBE YOU NEED TO LOOK AT, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME STUCCO SOLUTIONS, UH, AND TRYING TO RECESS THE WINDOWS SO THEY'RE NOT SKIN TIGHT AGAINST THE EXTERIOR AND LOOK AT, AT SOME OF THE, UH, THE, UH, VISUAL CUES AND, AND STYLISTIC, UH, LANGUAGE OF THE, OF THE HOUSE, AND PARTICULARLY THAT ENTRY AREA.
I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT, UH, JOHN SPIEGEL'S INVOLVED HAVE A LOT OF ADMIRATION FOR HIM AND HIS WORK.
UM, I THINK IT'S BEGINNING TO HEAD IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, BUT I, UM, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S STILL THAT ISSUE THAT WATER TABLE HAS REALLY DISRUPTED AN IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTIC OF, OF THE, OF THE BUILDING, WHICH WAS A DEEP SET PORCH WITH ARCHES.
I WAS PART OF A SECOND D R C MEETING.
UM, MAYBE COMMISSIONER FISH WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THAT.
I FELT LIKE WE HAD A, A GOOD CONVERSATION AS WELL.
UM, WE MET WITH, UH, MR. SPIEGEL AS A, WE COULDN'T USE HER COMMENT FOLLOW UP TO THE FIRST D R C.
UM, AND A LOT OF THE SAME ISSUES THAT COMMISSIONER CARPENTER JUST ADDRESSED CAME BACK UP.
UM, THERE, THERE WAS GENERALLY ACROSS BOTH DRCS, UM, FEELING THAT, THAT THE PORCH COULD BE ENCLOSED WITH WHICH STAFF IS IN OPPOSITION TO, AND I MEAN, THERE'S, AT LEAST FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, THIS HAS GOT, THE APPLICANT IS, UH, BECOMING PRETTY DISTRESSED ABOUT THE SITUATION.
IT DEFINITELY WENT PRETTY FAR IN THE WRONG DIRECTION AND TRYING TO FIND, UM, A REASONABLE, UH, WAY OUT OF THIS AND TO CAPTURING SOME OF THE, THE CHARACTER OF THE PORCH THAT WAS THERE BEFORE HAS, HAS BEEN DIFFICULT.
AND WE DIDN'T ARRIVE AT ANY MEANINGFUL SOLUTIONS, UM, BEYOND WHAT MR. SPIEGEL IS PRESENTING HERE.
UM, I I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANYTHING TO ADD.
COMMISSIONER GROOVE, DID YOU HAVE TO, WHAT? WHAT CAN WELL, I'LL LET YOU SPEAK FIRST BECAUSE YOU WERE NICER THAN ME.
THE DEFINING ELEMENTS OF THE PORCH ARE COMPLETELY GONE.
[01:00:01]
AND THAT WAS WHAT I WAS KEPT SAYING IN THIS, UM, D R C MEETING.THAT, THAT'S MY BIGGEST WORRY.
I DID MENTION WE'RE 11 COMMISSIONERS.
I DON'T DISLIKE THE PRO POSITION BY MR. SPIEGEL, BUT TO ME, THE WORRYING PART IS THAT ALL THE ELEMENTS OF THE ORIGINAL PORCH ARE PRACTICALLY GONE.
AND, AND THAT WAS REALLY WHAT I, THAT'S KIND OF THE REASON WHY I WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME, UM, APPROVING IT.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION IS.
I, I WILL LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR THE APPLICANT, THIS IS A BIG HEADACHE.
WE'VE GONE SO FAR IN THE CONSTRUCTION ALREADY THAT, YOU KNOW, BRINGING BACK ANY OF THE PORT ELEMENTS WOULD COST A LOT OF MONEY.
SO I'M HOPING THAT MY COMMISSIONERS WILL SEE THROUGH THAT.
UH, I, UM, I, I, I AGREE, UH, AND I WANT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE TREE FELL ON THIS PROPERTY AND THAT THE OWNERS CAN JUST PUT OURSELVES IN THEIR, IN THEIR POSITION.
IT'S KIND OF MORE AN ACTIVE AND EMERGENCY THAN ANYTHING.
UM, I AM, I AM PLEASED WITH THE PRESENTATION THAT, THAT, UH, MR. SPIEGEL PRESENTED.
IF, IF THERE'S A WAY TO PUT THAT SKETCH UP, UM, IT, IT CAPTURES THE STYLE OF THE HOUSE VERY WELL.
I, UM, I AGREE WITH THE, WITH THE, UM, NOT USING THE ARCH, BUT, BUT THE, BUT ALSO THE KIND OF THE, THE ROOT, UH, DELICATE, UH, UH, CAPTURING OF THE STYLE.
I DO WONDER WHETHER THE WINDOWS ARE, UM, THE TYPE OF WINDOWS THAT I KNOW THAT THE COMMISSION PREFERS.
UH, AND THIS, THIS IS A SITUATION THAT I THINK DOES, DOES WARRANT, UH, THE RIGHT, UH, USE OF, UM, OF A WINDOW, UH, WINDOW PIECE.
UM, BUT, UM, IT, IT DOES CAPTURE, CAPTURE, UH, THAT HOUSE.
AND, AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT PART OF ANY PROCESS, BUT I WOULD WONDER IF DRAWINGS WOULDN'T BE PREPARED AND KEPT ON FILE, OR IF, IF THEY WENT THAT FAR.
I KNOW THAT'S DONE WITH RESPECT TO HOUSES THAT ARE DEMOLISHED OR HOUSES THAT ARE MOVED FROM PLACES THAT, THAT THERE'S SOME EFFORT TO RECORD WHAT WAS THERE IN HISTORY.
BUT, UH, UM, I MEAN, THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHEN A HOUSE DOES CHANGE, AND IT'S NOT JUST BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO CHANGE IT, BUT BECAUSE THEY WERE REACTING TO SOMETHING.
AND, UH, MS. MR. SPIEGEL'S ADDITION TO THE, TO THE PROCESS, I THINK IS, I THINK IS VERY ELEGANT.
AND, UH, IT, IT FITS THE, IT FITS THE ARCHITECTURE.
UH, QUESTION FOR, UH, MR. SPIEGEL.
UM, HOW MUCH MORE BRICK IS STILL ON SITE AVAILABLE? 'CAUSE THE, THE, UH, EXTRA BRICK, I'M SORRY, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY EXTRA BRICK, THAT'S THAT'S ALL THE BRICK IS BEEN USED WITH.
THEY HAVE LEFT OVER FROM WHAT WAS TAKEN DOWN BEFORE.
BECAUSE, UH, THERE WAS A LOT MORE BRICK ON THE, THE FACADES, UH, BEFORE THE, UM, SELECTIVE DEMOLITION.
AND JUST WONDERING IF ANY WELL, I, I WAS TOLD BY THE OWNER THAT WHEN THEY TOOK THE BRICK DOWN, THAT'S ALL THEY COULD, THAT'S ALL THEY COULD SALVAGE FROM WHAT THEY TOOK DOWN.
UM, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHY THE, THAT'S WHY THEY JUST, THEY WENT TO THAT UP, THAT THEY WENT TO THAT POINT.
AND THE, AND THE WALL THERE IS BRICK.
THE, THE BRICK DOES EXTEND AROUND THE LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE, BUT THEY, THEY, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL BRICK TO MAKE IT ANY HIGHER.
UM, I AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THE, THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PORCH, UM, FEATURES OF THE HOUSE BEING LOST.
UM, I APPRECIATE, UH, YOUR APPROACH OF, UH, RECESSING THE WINDOWS TO GIVE A THICK WALL, UH, APPEARANCE.
UM, I GUESS WHAT I'M WONDERING IS IF WE WENT WITH THE FLATHEAD OPENINGS, UH, HAVE THEM RECESSED DOWN TO THE, UH, PORCH FLOOR SO THAT IT LOOKED LIKE INSTEAD OF THE ARCHED OPENINGS THAT WERE, UH, YOU KNOW, HEAD TO SILL, IF THESE WINDOW OPENINGS
[01:05:01]
WENT FROM HEAD TO SILL SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE, THIS BRICK WAINSCOATING RUNNING AROUND THE, THE, UM, THIS PORCH.AND THEN HAVING, UM, DEEP RETEST, UM, WOOD FRENCH DOORS THAT WOULD, UH, SHOW ALL THE, ALL FOUR OF THE, UH, DEEP RECESSES THAT THE, THE PREVIOUS PORCH PROVIDED, BUT THEN MAKING THE, THIS ELEMENT THAT STICKS OUT, UH, MAKING THAT STUCCO, UH, SINCE NONE OF THE BRICK, NOT ENOUGH BRICK IS AVAILABLE, IF THAT DESCRIPTION MAKES SENSE.
I LOST YOU A LITTLE BIT ON THE LAST PART, JEFF
I, I, I, I GOT ABOUT EXTENDING BELOW THE WINDOWS, BUT I COULDN'T TELL IF YOU WANNA PUT STUCCO BELOW THE WINDOWS.
WELL, I'M, SINCE THIS, UM, BRICK WAYNE'S COAT IS NOT TYPICAL, UH, ON THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE OR IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA OF MONTICELLO, IF THIS WHOLE PORCH FEATURE WAS, UH, MADE OUT OF STUCCO, UH, BUT WITH FOUR DEEP INSET OPENINGS THAT WENT FROM THE, UH, WINDOW HEAD DOWN TO THE, UH, FLOOR OF THE PORCH, AND THEN INSTEAD OF HAVING WINDOWS, YOU WOULD HAVE FRENCH DOORS.
SO THAT THE PORCH FEATURES, WHICH WERE THIS, THE ORIGINAL, WHICH WAS FOUR LARGE OPENINGS, UH, WERE STILL THERE, BUT THE INFILL HAPPENED, UM, INSET FROM THAT ON ALL FOUR, ON ALL THREE SIDES.
THIS CARPENTER, THAT'S ONLY A POSSIBILITY.
BUT THE ONLY THING IS WE WERE GONNA PUT THE HEDGE BACK ACROSS THE FRONT AND YOU DON'T SEE THE PORCH OPENING BELOW THE HEDGE.
THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO KEEP THE BRICK ACROSS THE FRONT.
THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I, UH, CHAIRMAN ZER, I THINK YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE HEADING IN A, IN DIRECTION I COULD SUPPORT IN THAT YOU RECAPTURE IN THE SENSE THAT THE, THAT WAS, UH, AN OPEN PORCH AND THOSE COULD BE FIXED FRENCH DOORS SO THAT IT'S NOT EVEN, THEY'RE NOT OPERABLE.
UH, BUT TO GIVE THAT SENSE OF DEPTH THAT GOES ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE ORIGINAL PORCH FLOOR, UH, I THINK IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT, IT IS THIS HORIZONTAL, UH, WAINS COAT OR, OR WATER TABLE HAS REALLY SIGNIFICANTLY ALTER ALTERED THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
WHICH
UM, I, I, UH, UM, WOULD, WOULD AGREE, UH, WITH, UH, FELLOW TWO COMMISSIONERS.
I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. SPIEGEL.
UH, IS THE, IS THE PORCH SLOPING FORWARD? THE, THE, THE, UH, FLOOR OF THE PORCH? IS IT FLAT? NO, IT'S PRETTY MUCH, IT'S PRETTY FLAT.
THAT'S VERY, IF THERE'S ANY DRAINAGE, IT'S VERY SMALL AT ALL THEN.
AND THAT, THEN THAT PROBABLY WOULD BE PERFECTLY FINE FOR THOSE TO BE PULLED DOWN TO THE BOTTOM THINGS WHEN YOU, BECAUSE YOU JUST WANNA MAKE ALLOTMENTS FOR IF, IF IT IS SLOPING RIGHT.
AND YOU DO PULL THOSE DOWN, THAT, THAT THEY'RE NOT FORCED INTO A SLOPE ROOM INSIDE OR HAVING TO LEVEL IT, UM, AND TO, TO MEET A DOOR OR EVEN IF IT'S A FIXED DOOR.
BUT I, I, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT.
UH, CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS TOO.
THIS IS CHAIRMAN, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER AGAIN.
IF YOU COMPARE PHOTO 16 WITH PHOTO 22, YOU CAN SEE THE, UM, WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT WE'VE CHANGED FROM A LARGE OPENING THAT WAS THE PORCH TO A SINGLE THREE OH DOOR, WHICH IS VERY, UH, DISRUPTIVE TO THE, I THINK DISRUPTIVE TO THE DESIGN AND THE ENTRY OF THE, OF THE HOME.
AND SO IF, UH, IF FOUR LARGE OPENINGS WERE PUT IN TO THIS PORCH THAT, UH, WERE SIMILAR IN, UM, HEIGHT AND WIDTH TO THE EXISTING, THEY COULD BE FLATHEAD, UH, OPENINGS AND THEN HAVE EITHER FIXED WINDOWS OR
[01:10:01]
FIXED, UM, FRENCH DOORS INSET TO PROVIDE THE DEPTH THAT THIS PORCH RE, UH, PREVIOUSLY HAD.UM, WELL, I, I THINK I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, LET'S, LET'S HAVE A CONTINUANCE ON THIS PROJECT AND WE'LL TAKE THE DESIGN IDEAS AND INTO CONSIDERATION AND THEN COME BACK TO THE COMMITTEE WITH A REVISED DESIGN CHAIRMAN, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UM, I THINK THAT'S AN EXCELLENT SU SUGGESTION 'CAUSE I, I AM CONFIDENT THAT JOHN WILL, WILL FIND A, A TASTEFUL SOLUTION ON THIS THAT CAPTURES WHAT WE'RE AFTER.
UH, SO I MOVE FOR A CONTINUANCE.
WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE AND HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
I DON'T WANT EXPLOITED EITHER, RIGHT.
AND I'LL NOTE THAT, UM, COMM COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ HAS LEFT THE MEETING FOR A MOMENT, BUT WE'LL RETURN.
GIBBS
YEAH, AND WE WILL GO SLIGHTLY OUT OF ORDER NOW,
[20-3778 Address/Description: 1026 HAYS ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-234 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Daniel Loredo Request: Construction of a front and side addition, and window and door replacement City Council Dist.: 2 ]
UM, BECAUSE THAT WAS WEE'S CASE.HE DOESN'T HAVE TIME TO CALL THE APPLICANT FOR 17, SO WE'RE GONNA GO TO ITEM 18.
EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I'M HERE WITH THE APPLICANT.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 18 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 34 10 26 HAYES.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION TO THE FRONT OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE TO FEATURE APPROXIMATELY 90 SQUARE FEET.
TWO, TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION TO THE SIZE OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE TO FEATURE APPROXIMATELY 112 SQUARE FEET.
THREE, REPLACE THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS WITH SEE DOUBLE HUNG WOOD WINDOWS OR REPLACE THE EXISTING CRAFTSMAN STYLE WOOD DOOR WITH THE NEW WOOD DOOR STAFF.
DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER ONE.
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FRONT EDITION BASED ON FINDING B STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PROPOSED EDITION BE RELOCATED TO A NON-PRIMARY FACADE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE CONSTRUCTION OF FACADE EDITION WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE PROPOSED EDITION BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE REAR OF THE EXISTING SIDE.
B TWO, THAT THE PROPOSED ADDITION FEATURE A ROOF THAT FORM ROOF FORM THAT IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE PRIMARY HISTORIC STRUCTURE AND AN OVERALL MASKING THAT IS SUBORDINATE.
THREE, THAT MATERIALS MATCH THOSE OF THE PRIMARY HISTORIC STRUCTURE, INCLUDING WINDOWS AND FOUR UPDATED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS BE SUBMITTED TO O H P STAFF FOR REVIEW.
NOTING COMPLIANCE WITH THE ABOVE STIPULATIONS THREE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE, THE WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS BASED ON FINDING D.
WHILE MANY WINDOWS ARE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR, STAFF FINDS THAT ONLY THOSE WINDOWS SHOULD BE REPLACED.
WINDOWS WITH EXISTING TOP AND BOTTOM SASHES, AS WELL AS INTACT RAILS SHOULD BE REPAIRED.
THE REPLACEMENT OF DETERIORATED WITH WINDOWS WITH A MATCHING REPLACEMENT IS ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL IN FOUR STAFF.
DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR DOOR REPLACEMENT.
BASED ON FINDINGS FINDING E STAFF RECOMMENDS THE EXISTING FRONT DOOR BE REPAIRED.
ONCE AGAIN, THE APPLICANT DANIEL LAREDO IS HERE ON THE LINE.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK DIRECTLY TO YOU ALL.
I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MY FATHER DANIEL LAREDO, THE APPLICANT.
UM, THIS IS OUR FIRST TIME GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
UM, AND AS YOU CAN SEE OUR APPLICATION DOCUMENTS, WERE PACKING THIS PROJECT OURSELVES, SO IF YOU COULD JUST BEAR WITH US, WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
UH, FIRST, JUST A LITTLE HISTORY ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, 10 26 HAY STREET HAS BEEN UNDER THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAREDO FAMILY FOR 45 YEARS NOW, WHEN MY GRANDFATHER PURCHASED IT IN 1975.
UH, SINCE THEN, IT HAS BEEN PASSED DOWN TO MY FATHER UNTIL VERY RECENTLY.
[01:15:01]
WAS, UH, A RENTAL UNIT HOUSING TENANT OCCUPIED THE HOME FOR OVER 15 YEARS.UH, DUE TO STRUCTURAL AND AESTHETIC ISSUES WITH THE PROPERTY, OUR FAMILY MADE THE DECISION TO FINALLY ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AND ASK OUR LONG-TERM TENANTS TO VACATE.
UM, TO DATE, WE HAVE REPAIRED THE FOUNDATION OF THE HOME AND ARE NOW READY TO CONTINUE ON IN THE RENOVATION PROCESS.
UM, I RECENTLY GRADUATED COLLEGE AND MY PARENTS AND I DECIDED THAT THIS, UM, PROJECT WAS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH, UH, 10 26 DAYS AS MY HOMESTEAD AND WILL NO LONGER BE OFFERED AS A RENTAL UNIT.
UH, THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY IS 984 SQUARE FEET CONSISTING OF A LIVING DINING AREA, KITCHEN, TWO BEDROOMS, AND ONE BATHROOM.
UH, THE PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK LIKE MR. HALL JUST, UH, WENT THROUGH IS FOR THE ADDITION, UH, TO THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE IN ADDITION TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER FOR A UTILITY SLASH LAUNDRY ROOM, UH, REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS AND THE FRONT DOOR.
UM, IN RESEARCH IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE IDENTIFIED SEVERAL HOMES THAT APPEALED TO US THAT WERE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DESIRED 10 26 KS TO LOOK LIKE.
UM, WHILE STAYING WITHIN THE DIGNITY HILL BUNGALOW STYLE THAT'S SO PREVALENT THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
INITIALLY, WE PLANNED TO PLACE THE ADDITION AT THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.
UM, HOWEVER, THE HOUSE IS ALREADY AT THE MINIMUM REAR SETBACK OF 20 FEET, UM, FOR THE R FIVE ZONING ORDINANCE.
UH, THEREFORE WE APPLIED TO PLACE THE ADDITION AT THE PRIMARY FACADE OF THE STRUCTURE.
UM, WE GET THAT THE GUIDELINES DON'T RECOMMEND ADDITIONS TO THE PRIMARY FACADE.
UM, AND SO WE'RE RESPECTFULLY ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE SETBACK ORDINANCE SO THAT WE MAY ADD, UM, TO THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE AND NOT THE PRIMARY FACADE.
UH, THIS ADDITION, UM, THE REASON WE WANT TO ADD THIS ADDITION IS, UH, FOR SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY TO GIVE US A LITTLE BIT MORE ROOM, UM, TO RECONFIGURE THE EXISTING LAYOUT OF THE HOUSE, ALLOWING FOR AN ADDITIONAL BATHROOM.
UH, THE SECOND EDITION IS, UH, CURRENTLY PLACED ON SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE HOUSE AND HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE O H, UH, O H P STAFF, UM, WITH SOME STIPULATIONS.
UH, WE WOULD PREFER NOT TO HINDER ANY MORE OF THE ACCESS TO, UM, THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY SINCE WE'RE PLANNING TO USE IT AS A DRIVEWAY.
UM, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN AMPLE ROOM, UH, FOR THE STREET TRAFFIC, CANNOT HAVE TO PARK OUR VEHICLES IN THE STREET.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, WE APPLIED FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS, UH, AND KIND OF AGAIN, LIKE MR. HALL SAID, ONLY, UM, SOME OF THE WOOD WINDOWS IS, UH, HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR REPLACEMENT WHILE OTHERS, UM, HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED FOR REPAIR.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY WE WERE UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE, UM, WITH MR. HALL PRIOR TO THE SITE VISIT.
AND AT THE TIME OF THE SITE VISIT, THE WINDOWS WERE, UH, BOARDED UP WITH PLYWOOD.
UM, WE DID THIS IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO SECURE THE PROPERTY A LITTLE BIT WHILE IT'S VACANT.
UM, AND WE'RE HOPING FOR AN ADDITIONAL SITE VISIT TO BE CONDUCTED WHEN THE WINDOWS ARE VISIBLE.
UM, AS SOME OF THE WINDOWS ARE DETERIORATED AND BEYOND THE NEED OF REPAIR.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE FOR ALL THE WINDOWS TO BE UNIFORM CONSISTENT WHILE STILL BEING VISUALLY AND HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
UM, WE RECEIVED MULTIPLE QUOTES FROM, UH, RODS LUMBER ON CHERRY STREET WITH JUST A LITTLE OVER HALF A MILE FROM THE PROJECT SITE AND ALLEN AND ALLEN COMPANY.
THESE, UM, LOCAL COMPANIES, UM, GAVE US QUOTE FOR SOME JELLED WIND WINDOWS THAT WE'VE SEEN A LOT AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UM, ARE, YOU KNOW, CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING WINDOWS AND ARE A LITTLE MORE, UH, ENERGY EFFICIENT THAN, THAN THE CURRENT WINDOWS.
UM, AND LASTLY, THE FRONT DOOR IS A CRAFTSMAN DOOR THAT WE BELIEVE HAS LOST ITS STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY.
UM, IT'S A WEAK DOOR THAT, YOU KNOW, IN, IN OUR OPINION, DOESN'T PROVIDE THAT MUCH SECURITY.
UH, IT'S DIFFICULT TO LOCK AND THEN REMAIN LOCKED, UM, AND A BUTTON OF THE DOOR IS MISSING, SO THEREFORE TWO OF THE SIX PANEL LIGHTS ARE MISSING.
UM, THE DOOR WE INCLUDED IN OUR APPLICATION, UM, IS THE SAME CRAFT DOOR THAT IS GROWING ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ASKING FOR JUST THE REPLACEMENT OF THE DOOR WITH, UM, JUST THE NEWER VERSION OF THE SAME DOOR.
UM, WE ARE JUST, YOU KNOW, LOOKING FOR SOME GUIDANCE, UM, AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO, UH, HEARING THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND OPINIONS.
[01:20:03]
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.IS THERE A SITE PLAN? I'M HAVING A HARD TIME FINDING ONE IN THE PACKAGE.
UH, WE
UH, IN GENERAL, I FEEL LIKE, UM, GOING THROUGH THE PACKAGE AND I WENT THROUGH IT EARLIER, I WAS, I, I WOULDN'T, UM, MIND SUPPORTING, UH, REPLACEMENT OF ALL THE WINDOWS.
UM, I MEAN, AND UNLESS A SITE VISIT WOULD PROBABLY HELP STAFF ALSO TO CONCLUDE, I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE A LOT OF THE WINDOWS LOOK IN, UH, IN A TERRIBLE SHAPE.
I MEAN, IN, IN, IN MY OPINION, I THINK WE'VE SEEN, UM, MUCH BETTER AND ALSO HAVE APPROVED AS LONG AS, UM, AND THE, AND THE PROVIDERS THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING ARE NOT, I DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY'RE WHOLESALE, SO I FIND AS LONG AS HE REPLACING WITH IN KIND THE WOOD AND, AND ONE OF A ONE, UM, ON, I WOULD ALSO, UM, PIECES AT THE FRONT.
I MEAN, THE DOOR REPLACEMENT AND JUST THE APPLICANT HAS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ALSO, UH, REPLACING A TINY, IF I UNDERSTAND RIGHT, AND MAYBE STAFF CAN PULL UP THE PICTURE OF THE DOOR THAT'S BEING REPLACED.
BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT WAS A DOOR THAT LOOKED PRETTY, UM, IN BAD SHAPE.
NOW, THE FRONT ADDITION, I AGREE WITH STAFF AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY WAY AROUND THAT FRONT ADDITION.
I MEAN, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE NORMALLY SEE.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE NORMALLY APPROVE.
I WOULD REFER THE APPLICANT MAYBE TO GO TO A D R C AND WE CAN DISCUSS HOW WE CAN ADD ON, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE WITHOUT ADDING IT ON ON THE FRONT.
COMMERS QUICKLY, WE DO HAVE, UM, PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS CASE.
UM, THIS COMES FROM THE, UM, CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, THEY OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED RECONFIGURATION OF THE ADE AT 10 26 HAYES.
UM, THIS IS A FINE EXAMPLE OF A CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW DEFINED BY TWO GABLE ROOFS FACING THE STREET.
DELIN DELINEATING THE ENTRANCE PORCH IN THE MAIN BODY OF THE HOUSE, PROPOSED FOR AN ADDITION, WOULD ITERATE THIS HISTORIC DESIGN AND CREATE AN ENTIRELY NEW ROOF LINE.
WE SUPPORT THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATION THAT THE FRONT ADDITION NOT BE APPROVED, THE ORIGINAL ORIENTATION OF THE ROOF FORMS AND PORTS SHOULD ALSO BE PRESERVED.
SECONDLY, WE SUPPORT THE O H P RECOMMENDATION THAT THE SATURN REAR ADDITIONS BE MOVED BACK, SO THEY'RE PURELY SUBSIDIARY TO THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
FINALLY, WE CONCUR WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT THE HISTORIC WINDOWS THAT ARE REPAIRABLE SHOULD BE RETAINED TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.
THIS IS, UH, FETZER COULD, UH, STAFF PULL UP A GOOGLE EARTH VIEW AND IT'LL SHOW, UH, THAT THERE IS NOT MUCH BACKYARD, UM, ON THIS PROPERTY.
SO, UH, MR. LAREDO IS PROBABLY CORRECT THAT IF ADDITIONS WERE PUT ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, HE MAY HAVE TO GO FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE SETBACK REAR SETBACK.
SO SOMETHING HAPPENED WITH THE, UM, MONITOR WE'RE STREAMING FROM THAT MESSED WITH THE, THE SOLUTION.
SO EVERYTHING'S KIND STRANGE RIGHT NOW.
MR. LAREDO, UH, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DI DIMENSION IS FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE TO YOUR, UH, REAR FENCE LINE? IT'S, UH, 20 FEET.
WELL, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
AGAIN, I CONCUR WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE, UH, FRONT ADDITION NOT BE, UH, PLACED ON THE HOUSE AND THAT THE SIDE ADDITION BE MOVED FURTHER TO THE REAR.
UM, I THINK I COULD SUPPORT, UM, THIS APPLICANT IN GOING FOR A VARIANCE TO PUT THE ADDITIONS ON THE REAR
[01:25:06]
BY THIS APPLICATION.CAN STAFF SHOW US THE DOOR THAT IS EXACTLY BEING REPLACED AND THE APPLICANT, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO REPLACE THIS WITH AN IN-KIND DOOR, WOULD THE SAME WAY, THE SAME DESIGN WITH THE SAME ELEMENTS AS WELL AS THE WINDOWS? YES.
THE, THE, UM, THE QUOTES WE GOT FROM THE WINDOW COMPANIES, UM, YOU KNOW, THE BROADEST LUMBER IS, IS FAMILIAR WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES.
AND THEY, UM, WE SENT THEM PICTURES OF, OF OUR, OF OUR CURRENT WINDOWS, AND THEY, UH, PROVIDED A QUOTE WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, WINDOWS THAT ARE LIKE, AND CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
UM, AND THEN THE DOOR, WE, WE FOUND, UM, A SIMILAR CRAFTSMAN DOOR, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ARE WILLING TO, TO MANAGE THE SAME MATERIALS THAT WE'RE WILLING TO REPLACE THE, THE EXISTING DOOR WITH, I BELIEVE THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT DOORS ON PAGE 62.
THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, UM, COMMENTS TO THE CHAIR, MR. CHAIR? I, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE THAT I WOULD BE AGAINST THE ADDITION AS PRESENTED.
UH, I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH THE, THE IDEA IS THE DRAWINGS.
UM, BUT IF, IF THE, I MEAN, JUST LOOKING AT THE HOUSE TOO, I MEAN, THIS IS A MASSIVE UNDERTAKING THAT I THINK MOST PEOPLE WOULD'VE CONSIDERED DEMOLISHING SO THAT THE, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR HAVING AN EYE AND A, AND A HEART FOR, FOR THIS BUILDING.
UM, AND, AND BEING WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, PUT IN THE HARD WORK TO, TO BRING THIS, UM, BACK.
BUT THAT BEING SAID, IF THAT'S THE INTENT AND THE SIDING AND, AND, AND THE VOCABULARY THAT THIS HOUSE SPEAKS IS, UM, IS TO BE, UM, PRESERVED, THEN IT GIVES ME EVERY CONFIDENCE THAT THE ADDITION WILL SPEAK THE SAME VOCABULARY.
AND, AND THIS TYPE OF HOUSE IN SAN ANTONIO IS, IS THE TYPE OF HOUSE THAT YOU WOULD FIND OWNER DESIGNED ADDITIONS TO OF THIS ERA, AND THEY WOULD'VE DONE THESE, THESE ADDITIONS IN LIKE FASHION.
UH, SO, UH, IT, IT'S, IT'S NOT OUT OF THE QUESTION.
THE OTHER THING IS THAT, UM, CREATING A LINEAR, A, A A FRONT TO BACK LINEARNESS IS JUST AS OUT OF CONTEXT AS AN ADDITION TO THE SIDE IN, IN, IN REALITY.
NOW, I KNOW THAT, THAT THE STREETSCAPE CHANGES, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS A VERY COMMON HOUSE, UM, IN SAN ANTONIO, UH, KIND OF REMINISCENT OF, UH, CLOSER TO THE TRACT HOUSE.
AND THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF HOUSE THAT SOMEONE THAT HAD A FAMILY AND THE FAMILY GREW AND THEY ADDED AN ADDITION.
SO I, I THINK IT WOULD BE A VERY, UH, VERY APPROPRIATE, UH, EXPECTATION THAT THIS HOUSE WOULD GROW OUT THE SIDE AND, AND FORMING A LITTLE BIT MORE A AROUNDER, UH, UM, AROUND HER HOME AT HOME LIFE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A CENTRAL, UH, PLAN AS OPPOSED TO, UH, A LONG, UH, PLAN THAT DOESN'T REALLY ENCOURAGE, UH, UH, GATHERING, COMMUNAL GATHERING ON THE INTERIOR.
SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO CONSIDER, UH, UH, THE, UM, THE ADDITION AS IT IS, AS IT'S PRESENTED, BUT, BUT AGAIN, PROVIDED THAT IF, IF THE INTENT IS TO DO THIS ADDITION IN THE SAME FASHION AS, AS, AS WHAT IT APPEARS THAT THE, THE, UH, THE COMMITMENT IS THAT I THINK IT WOULD BE AN ELEGANT, UH, OR, YOU KNOW, UH, I WOULD USE THE WORD HUMBLE, UM, EXPRESSION OF HOW IT WOULD'VE, UH, HAPPENED IN ITS OWN, IN ITS OWN LIFE.
HAD IT HAPPENED BEFORE, IT WAS A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M READY TO DO A MOTION.
[01:30:01]
SO I'M GONNA PULL UP THE P D F JUST SO I HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.I, UM, IF THE APPLICANT CAN CHOOSE TO EITHER, UM, YOU KNOW, REMOVE ITEM NUMBER ONE, BUT I WOULD MOVE FOR DENIAL OF NUMBER ONE.
UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND STAFF, UH, THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK WITH A KIND OF A, MAYBE TO A D R C TO DISCUSS THE FRONT EDITION, UH, APPROVE ITEM NUMBER TWO WITH STIPULATIONS ONE THROUGH FOUR AND APPROVE ITEM NUMBER THREE AND ITEM NUMBER FOUR, AS LONG AS REPLACEMENT ARE IN KIND.
I, I, I SECOND THIS VELASQUEZ JUST LIKE TO, UH, CLARIFY THAT ITEM NUMBER ONE WOULD BE, UM, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO MAYBE COME BACK TO, I MEAN, I THINK I HEARD YOU RIGHT, RIGHT THERE, BUT IT COULD GO TO COMMITTEE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW STAFF WILL ANALYZE.
UM, I WOULD NOT APPROVE AS SUBMITTED TODAY, BUT I'LL BE WILLING TO ACCEPT FOR THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK WITH A FRONT ADDITION OR SOME SIMILAR ADDITION TO D IT WOULD COME TO D R C FIRST.
I WOULD PROBABLY STICK WITH DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER ONE AS PRESENTED.
I, MY, MY SECOND WOULD STAND AS, UH, UNDERSTOOD.
WE HAVE A MRS. FITZER, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? I, I DO HAVE A, A QUICK, UH, STATEMENT FOR THAT IS, YOU KNOW, JUST TO MAKE SURE TO THE APPLICANT THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, COMMISSIONER GRUE WAS HER GROUP WAS VERY CLEAR AND HER, UH, YOU KNOW, WILLINGNESS TO TAKE ON, UH, ANOTHER REVIEW OF THE FRONT, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN ALL THE COMMISSIONERS OR THE STAFF WOULD APPROVE THAT.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S VERY CLEAR.
UH, MAY WE HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE.
WE'RE, WE'RE DEALING WITH SOME OF THESE TECH ISSUES IN THE BACKGROUND, SO WE'RE GONNA GO BACK NOW TO ITEM 17.
UM, WE'RE GONNA UNMUTE WE, ARE YOU THERE? YEP.
[20-3769 Address/Description: 602 E CARSON HDRC Case No.: 2020-240 Historic District Name: Government Hill Applicant: Linda Lira/LIRA LINDA Request: Fence replacement with new driveway gate City Council Dist.: 2 ]
ITEM NUMBER, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 17, CASE NUMBER 20 22 40 AT 2 0 6 EAST CARSON.THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL.
TWO ONE, REPAIR AND REPLACE THE EXISTING FRONT YARD FENCE.
TWO, TO REINSTALL A MISSING PEDESTRIAN GATE AT THE FRONT INSTALL A CHAIN LINK SLIDING DRIVEWAY GATE, WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO FEATURE A MATCHING WOOD PROFILE ALREADY.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF IN-KIND WOOD FENCE REPAIR AND PEDESTRIAN GATE INSTALLATION BASED ON FINDING B.
DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DRIVEWAY GATE AS PROPOSED BASED ON FINDING.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE FRONT YARD FENCE TURN AT THE DRIVEWAY TO MEET AT THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE RATHER THAN SPAN ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY AT THE RIGHT OF WAY.
TWO, THAT THE DRIVEWAY GATE IS SET BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE.
THREE, THAT THE PROPOSED FENCE FEATURE A DESIGN THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINE.
AND FOUR, THAT THE REAR PRIVACY FENCE NOT EXCEED SIX FEET IN HEIGHT.
AND LIKE I SAID, AS A REMINDER, THE APPLICANT, UH, HAS AGREED TO FEATURE A, A WOOD GATE TO MATCH IF A FRONT GATE IS APPROVED.
IS THE APPLICANT THERE JOSEPH? YES, I'M HERE.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO START BY SAYING THE, JUST TO UNDERSTAND, THE FRONT FENCE WOULD START AT THE FENCE LINE AND THE GATE WOULD SWING IN.
IS THAT WHAT YOU GUYS ARE PROPOSING? THAT I, THERE, UH, JOSEPH PER STAFF, UH, STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR FRONT DRIVEWAYS, WE TYPICALLY ASK THAT YOU TURN THE GATE, UH, INSTEAD OF SPANNING ACROSS THE FRONT FENCE LINE, FRONT FENCE LINE AND THAT THE, A DRIVEWAY GATE WOULD
[01:35:01]
BE SET BEHIND THE FACE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.UM, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'LL DO THEN.
SO IF YOU COULD PULL UP, UH, UH, PHOTO 15, WHICH I BELIEVE IS, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
CONCEPTUALLY HAVING THE DRIVEWAY GATE BEHIND THE, UH, FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE.
UM, I'M NOT SURE, BUT I THOUGHT, I JUST HEARD THE APPLICANT, UH, SUGGEST THAT, UM, HE DOES NOT HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT STIPULATION AND I ASK THE APPLICANT FOR CLARITY.
YES, THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH THAT.
ALRIGHT, THEN I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF STAFF STIPULATIONS.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? YES, I BELIEVE, UM, COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ HAS STEPPED AWAY.
UM, SO THAT BRINGS US TO FISH.
OKAY, SO THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 19.
[20-3777 Address/Description: 123 CROFTON HDRC Case No.: 2020-212 Historic District Name: King William RIO District: RIO-4 Applicant: catherine nored/nored architecture Request: Construction of a 2-story rear addition City Council Dist.: 1 ]
ARE YOU THERE? I AM, YES.AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 19, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH TWO 12.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY REAR ADDITION WITH SCREENED FORS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STORY REAR ADDITION BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH L WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT REDUCES THE MASSING OF THE ADDITION AND RECESSES THE ADDITION BEHIND THE WALL PLANE OF THE NORTH ELEVATION OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDING E TWO THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS REVISED ELEVATION DRAWINGS FEATURING THE FENESTRATION PATTERN WITH MORE TRADITIONAL PROPORTIONS BASED ON FINDING J THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLS A SHINGLE ROOF ON THE ADDITION TO MESH THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AS NOTED IN FINDING G FOUR THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS FOR FULLY WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLOUD WINDOWS THAT MEET STAFF STIPULATIONS.
AND JUST THE CASE COMMENT, THIS REQUEST WAS HEARD AT A D R C ON MAY 28TH, AND THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN UPDATED TO REFLECT, UM, THE COMMISSIONER'S SUGGESTIONS AT THE D R C CATHERINE IS ON THE LINE.
UM, CATHERINE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS STAFF STIPULATION? UM, YES, BUT FIRST, UH, THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION WHEN I MADE THE, UM, WHEN I UPLOADED EVERYTHING AS TO WHETHER WE WERE CHOOSING TO REQUEST APPROVAL FOR A SHINGLE ROOF OR A METAL ROOF.
UM, I BELIEVE WE HAD SETTLED ON A METAL ROOF AND THAT WOULD BE REPLACING, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE REPLACING THE EXISTING ROOF, UH, UH, AND IT, AND WOULD BE THE SAME FOR THE, THE PROPOSED ROOF.
UM, AS FAR AS THE MASSING, WE REDUCED THE, THE, UM, THE MASSING BY QUITE A BIT FROM THE, UM, THE FIRST MEETING, UM, THE FENESTRATIONS, UH, WERE ADDRESSED.
AND, UM, THE ONLY THING THAT WASN'T ADDRESSED THAT, UH, I THINK THAT WE'LL PROBABLY NEED TO DISCUSS TODAY IS, UH, IS PULLING THE SEVEN FOOT EXTENSION TO THE SIDE.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN AS IS AS SHOWN, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, WE DO HAVE A COMMENT AND THEN IF WE CAN GET A D R C REPORT, PLEASE.
UM, SO WE'RE GONNA TRY TO PLAY THAT NOW.
WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND DO THE D R C REPORT WHILE WE GET THAT LOADED.
DO WE HAVE A REPORT FROM D R C? THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
I'M SORRY, I WAS TRYING TO UNMUTE.
UM, I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER CARPENTER
[01:40:01]
AND I WERE, UH, IN THE D R C, UH, WHEN WE REVIEWED THIS AND, UH, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS BEING A REPLACEMENT TO A PREVIOUSLY REMOVED ADDITION.AND I THINK WE HAD REQUESTED, UH, ANY DRAWINGS OR EVIDENCE, UH, TO THAT FACT PARTICULARLY, UH, AS IT PERTAINED TO THE NORTH ELEVATION BECAUSE IT APPEARED THAT THERE HAD BEEN, UH, PREVIOUS ADDITION ON THE NORTH, UH, THAT BUMPED OUT ON THE NORTH SIDE THAT HAD BEEN REMOVED BASED ON THE PHOTOGRAPHS, BUT WE WEREN'T SURE.
SO WE HAVE NEW INFORMATION HERE ON THAT.
UH, WE ASKED THE APPLICANT TO LOWER THE ROOF LINE SO THAT IT DIDN'T EXCEED THE ADDITION, DIDN'T EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE RIDGE ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
AND THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THE ELEVATION FACING, UM, THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER, UH, KIND OF EVOKING A SLEEPING PORCH OR A SCREENED IN KIND OF PORCH AS, UH, BEING PART OF THE LANGUAGE THAT COULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AREA.
AND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER MAY HAVE SOME ADDITIONS.
NO, THAT, THAT PRETTY MUCH CAPTURES IT AND I THINK I WAS THE ONE THAT MADE THE COMMENT ABOUT THE SLEEPING PORCH, UM, SEEING HOW THAT THAT IS, UH, AN APPROPRIATE, UH, THING THAT YOU FIND THROUGHOUT, UH, THROUGHOUT ALL OF SAN ANTONIO WHERE, UH, PORCHES HAVE BEEN CLOSED.
IT'S KIND OF TWO STORY PORCHES LIKE THAT.
UM, SO THAT WAS A GOOD SUMMARY.
UH, IF, IF, IF, ARE WE READY TO PLAY THE RECORDING? WE ARE.
UM, SO I'LL EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED HERE.
WE, THERE'S A TWO MONITOR SET UP THAT IS STREAMING THE MEETING AND ONE OF THE MONITORS HAS TURNED OFF.
I SUSPECT THAT THE SOUND WAS, WAS FUNCTIONING THROUGH THE OTHER ONE THAT THAT IS DROPPED NOW DON'T WE HAVE A TRANSCRIPT THAT THE VOICEMAIL IN OUR PACKAGE, I SAW SOMETHING IN WRITING YEP.
ON THE, CAN YOU JUST READ THAT? NO.
SO ROBERT RE READS, UM, WITH THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION WAS GOING TO READ A VERSION OF THIS.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE A LETTER THAT WAS SUBMITTED.
UM, THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND CONCURS WITH SOME OF THE STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
THE STIPULATIONS 1, 2, 4, AND FIVE, HOWEVER, STIPULATION THREE REQUIRING A COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF BE INSTALLED AS NOT NECESSARILY APPROPRIATE.
THE STRUCTURE WAS CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1910.
COMPOSITION SHINGLES WERE INTRODUCED IN THE US AROUND 1911.
IF THE STRUCTURE DID HAVE COMPOSITION SHINGLES IN 1910, THEY WERE VERY MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE SHINGLES ON THE MARKET TODAY.
AND KING WILLIAM, OTHER OWNERS HAVE BEEN GRANTED APPROVAL TO REPLACE COMPOSITION SHINGLE BRUISES WITH STANDING SEA METAL, PROVIDED THE MATERIAL AND DETAILS MEET THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES.
THERE IS, HOWEVER, A COMPELLING OBJECTION TO THIS PROJECT.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG THE RIVERWALK AND HIGHLY VISIBLE BY PEDESTRIANS AT BLUE STAR ACROSS THE RIVER.
THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC STRUCTURE IS WELL BALANCED.
IT'S IN ITS SIMPLISTIC COMPOSITION AND PLEASING PROPORTIONS.
THE PROPOSED EDITION IS A CONGLOMERATION OF FORMS AND ELEMENTS.
THE WEST ELEVATION FACING THE RIVER CONSISTS OF AN ILL BALANCED ROOF FORM EXTREMELY FOUR INTO THIS HOUSE AND IN ANY
THE ADDITION DESIGN IS OVERLY COMPLEX WITHOUT DISCIPLINE.
IT'S COMPLETELY OUT OF CHARACTER AND WILL SURELY DETRACT FROM THE ATTRIBUTES OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
PLEASE CONSIDER DENYING APPROVAL AND REQUEST THE APPLICANT RESUBMIT A DESIGN USING MORE TRADITIONAL FORMS WITH SOME KEY REVISIONS.
THIS COULD BE A WONDERFUL PROJECT IN KEEPING WITH HISTORIC CHARACTER TO THE DELIGHT OF THE PASSER PLAN ON THE RIBBON.
I UNDERSTOOD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THEY WANT METAL ROOF.
IS THAT WHAT WAS AN APPLICATION AND THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING WITH STAFF REGARDING THAT STIPULATION? UM, NO.
I MEAN, IN OUR REVIEW, UM, WE DIDN'T FIND THAT
[01:45:01]
HISTORICALLY THERE HAD BEEN A METAL ROOF AND SO WE WERE FINDING THAT THE SHEET WAS MORE APPROPRIATE.UM, SO THAT WAS A RECOMMENDED STIPULATION TO THIS STAFF COMPONENT OF THE REQUEST.
DOES APPLICANT HAVE ANY, UH, DOCUMENTATION THAT MAY HAVE BEEN, UH, A METAL ROOF PRIOR? UM, WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANY INDICATION THAT IT WAS, UH, A METAL ROOF.
THERE'S, THERE'S NO, UM, SUGGESTION OF WHAT IT WAS.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A METAL ROOF STANDING SEA METAL ROOF.
AND THEN FROM THE OTHER STIPULATIONS, JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH MOST OF THEM, BUT ONE WHICH WAS, WAS THAT THE MASSING? CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR ME WHICH ONE OF THE STIPULATION WAS THE ONE THAT YOU, UH, WERE HOPING WE COULD DISCUSS? I'M, I'M SORRY, THI THIS IS CATHERINE.
WHO, WHO ARE YOU ASKING? I'M ASK, I'M A COMMISSIONER GROUP.
I'M ASKING YOU IF YOU CAN CLARIFY WHICH OF THE STIPULATIONS FROM STAFF WAS THE ONE THAT YOU WERE IN DISAGREEMENT WITH.
COMMISSIONER AND CATHERINE, I MAY BE ABLE TO HELP.
I THINK THAT PERHAPS, UM, YOU WANTED TO CONTEST STAFF STIPULATION ONE TO REDUCE THE MASSING OF THE ADDITION AND RECESS, THE ADDITION BEHIND THE WALL PLANE OF THE NORTH ELEVATION.
IS THAT CORRECT? CATHERINE, ARE YOU THERE? I'M HERE.
WAS THAT CORRECT THAT YOU WANTED TO CONTEST STIPULATION ONE TO REDUCE THE MASSING OF THE ADDITION AND RECESS IT BEHIND THE WALL POINT OF THE NORTH ELEVATION? WE, WE DID, WE DID, UH, REDUCE THE MASSING AS FAR AS THE, UM, THE ADDITION THAT'S TO THE NORTH.
UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO THE PANEL'S ATTENTION THAT THIS IS A RIO FOUR, UM, AREA.
AND SO I MEAN, SPECIFICALLY IT SAYS THAT, UM, TO CONSTRUCT NEW DEVELOPMENTS THAT COMPLEMENT, UH, THE NEARBY HISTORIC KING WILLIAM AREA, BUT DOES NOT MIMIC ITS STYLE AND ENCOURAGE NEW DEVELOPMENT IN CLUSTERED NODES.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT IT, IT'S ASKING FOR US TO, UH, BE SENSITIVE TO THE KEN KING WILLIAM AREA, BUT IT'S ALSO ENCOURAGING US NOT TO MIMIC ITS STYLE.
UM, WHEN WE, WHEN, WHEN I, WHEN I LOOKED AT THE STRUCTURE, UM, WE HAVE AN ADDITION TOWARDS THE BACK ON THE LEFT SIDE OF OUR STRUCTURE, AND IN ORDER TO BALANCE IT, UH, I FELT LIKE WE NEEDED TO, UM, TO CREATE SOMETHING ON THE, ON THE NORTH SIDE TOO, ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
UH, IN ADDITION, I PROVIDED, UH, PROOF FROM GOOGLE MAPS SATELLITE MAPS, UM, THAT THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR DID SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR.
THEY, THEY BROKE THAT LINE AND WITH AN ADDITION TO THE NORTH, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING.
KATHERINE, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
UM, I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD ASK YOU JUST COULD YOU WALK US THROUGH THE CONTEXT, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS A UNIQUE PART OF KING WILLIAM, THE CONTEXT TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, UP AND DOWN THE RIVER.
UM, AS FAR AS THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I'M HAVING A LITTLE BIT HARD TIME.
IF STAFF COULD PUT UP THE SATELLITE IMAGE SO THAT WE CAN KIND OF SEE THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENT ON THE SCREEN.
UM, I THINK THE, THE, YOUR PROPOSAL MAKES, MAKES MORE SENSE WHEN YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, UH, THIS PARTICULAR PART OF THE DISTRICT AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE, TO THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH.
SO PAGE 13 OUT OF THE FOUR, THIS IS CATHERINE, PAGE 13 OUT OF THE 40, UM, SHOWS KIND OF A BIRD'S EYE WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE ADDITION ON, UM, THE SOUTH SIDE OF OUR STRUCTURE, THE NEIGHBOR AND, UM, AND HOW THEY CREATED AN ADDITION THERE WITH, UH, WITH ACTUALLY DIFFERENT MASSING AND PROPORTIONS, UH, FROM THE STREET.
AND, UM, AND OURS IS NOT AS SEVERE AS THAT, AS THEIR ADDITION WAS.
WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS SOMETHING MUCH MORE SUBTLE AND UNFORTUNATELY STAFF IS HAVING AN ISSUE WITH SCREEN SHARE AT THE MOMENT THAT WE'RE WORKING ON.
BUT, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PACKET IN ADDITION TO PAGE 13 THAT CATHERINE MENTIONED, SHE WAS PREVIOUSLY
[01:50:01]
MENTIONING THE GOOGLE EARTH PHOTO ON PAGE 22 OF THE PACKET, AND THAT SHOWS THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE AND ITS ADDITIONS AS WELL.I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UH, I WENT ON THE O H P, UH, ADDRESS SEARCH, AND THIS IS DESIGNATED, IT'S LISTED AS AN INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK PROPERTY.
UM, AND JUST AS A NOTE TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSION AND THEN A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, WITH THE SIZE OF THE ADDITION YOU'RE PROPOSING, UH, WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF GROUND COVER, UH, THAT'S LEFT OR, YOU KNOW, BUILT STRUCTURE UHHUH AS OPPOSED TO, UH, LANDSCAPED AREA? UH, WE'RE, WE HAVE 50% LOG COVERAGE, AND SO WE HAVE A LOT OF SPACE FOR LANDSCAPING.
I THINK THAT THE CUTOFF IS AT 30 AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE 20% ABOVE THAT.
ACCORDING TO THE COMMENTS FROM STAFF, IT'S THE, IT'S WITHIN THE GUIDELINES.
MR. CHAIRMAN, WHAT I UNDERSTOOD FROM THE FINDINGS, I THINK WHAT STAFF HAVING, UH, THE REASON FOR THE SOMEBODY IS NOT COMMISSIONER FITCH, CAN YOU MUTE OR I KNOW SOMEBODY'S, THANK YOU.
UM, SO WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THE FINDING IS THAT THE APPLICANT IS GOING A LITTLE BIT TO THE SIDE ON THAT NORTH SIDE FACADE, LIKE SO IT'S COULD BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
THE NEIGHBOR AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER FISH, THE NEIGHBOR DID THE SAME THING, KIND OF WENT A LITTLE BIT OUT OF THE FRONT.
NOW THIS IS THE ADDITION AND IT'S SO FAR BACK.
I DON'T KNOW HOW VISIBLE THAT SIDE ADDITION, LIKE OUTSIDE OF THE, OF THE PLANE, OF THE, AS LONG, THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE WOULD ACTUALLY BE VISIBLE.
AND THEN I ALSO THINK THAT THIS IS KIND OF A DIFFERENT CASE BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN ENCLOSED PORCH, WELL NOT ENCLOSED SCREEN PORCH, SO IT'S NOT AN ADDITION LIKE THERE'S LIKE LITERALLY A WALL.
UM, I WOULD SAY THE SCREENS MAYBE GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A TRANSPARENCY.
I, I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD SUPPORT IT AS, UH, THE APPLICANT IS SUBMITTING IF THE APPLICANT ALSO AGREES TO ALL THE STIPULATIONS.
NOW ON THE ROOFING, I'M A LITTLE BIT WORRIED ABOUT THE MISUNDERSTANDING.
UM, I THINK BASED ON THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY'S COMMENT, I WOULDN'T, UM, MIND DETAINING THE IDEA OF A, OF A METAL ROOF.
BUT SINCE THIS WAS NOT IN THE REQUEST, THERE'S NO, UH, STAFF STIPULATIONS, UH, ON THAT METAL ROOF.
I, THAT WAS PART OF THE REQUEST.
UM, THERE WAS JUST SOME CONFUSION.
THERE IS A FINDING FOR THE CHANGE OF ROOF ROOFING MATERIAL AND UM, THEREFORE ALSO A STIPULATION.
THE CONFUSION WAS THAT POTENTIALLY THE WORDING OF STIPULATION NUMBER THREE MIGHT MAKE IT SOUND LIKE THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING TO ONLY INSTALL A METAL ROOF ON THE ADDITION AND THAT WASN'T THE CASE.
SO THE LANGUAGE MAY HAVE SEEMED CONFUSING.
HOWEVER, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO REPLACE THE ROOF ON THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND INSTALL A ROOF ON THE ADDITION.
THAT'S METAL STANDING, SAME METAL.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ.
I, I FIND THE, THE ADDITION A, A, A WONDERFUL SOLUTION, VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT.
AND, UM, I, ON, ON, UH, JUST ON THE ARCHITECTURAL BASIS, IT'S CONSISTENT.
IT'S CONSISTENT WITH ITSELF AND I THINK IT'S A, IT IS A GREAT ADDITION, UH, TO THE, TO THE LANGUAGE.
UM, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR CATHERINE AND I THINK, UH, WE CAN NAVIGATE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PAGE 20 OUT OF 40.
CATHERINE, COULD YOU WALK US THROUGH THE HISTORY OF ADDITIONS WHERE YOU'RE PROPOSING THIS ADDITION? YES, SO, SO THE SITE PLAN ON PAGE 20 IS, UH, WAS WHAT WAS THERE.
UM, IT WAS THE, UH, EXISTING WHEN THE CLIENT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
AND, UM, SITE PLAN ON PAGE 19, UH, IS JUST THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
UM, ALTHOUGH THE ADDITION TO THE RIGHT, UH, WHAT, UH, WAS A LATER ADDITION, I JUST COULDN'T FIND A SITE PLAN WITH THE, UH, WITH THE HOUSE WITHOUT THAT.
UH, AND THEN ON PAGE 21 IS THE SITE PLAN WITH WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
[01:55:04]
THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES, IT DID.ON PAGE 22, I TRIED TO, UM, TO SHOW HOW IT, UH, HOW IT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN COMPARISON TO THE NEIGHBOR.
AND WE CAN SEE THAT IT DOESN'T PUSH SO FAR BACK AS THE, THE NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH, UM, OR THE NEIGHBOR AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT SCREEN, WHICH IS TO THE SOUTH.
UM, I THINK IN THE D R C, JUST A FOLLOW UP ON THAT, UH, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE PREVIOUS ADDITION THAT HAD BEEN REMOVED ITS FOOTPRINT AND WHERE IT SET HAD A LOT TO, TO DO WITH HOW WE WERE THINKING ABOUT THE BUMP OUT TO THE NORTH.
I THINK THAT THE VISUAL IMPACT OF THE BUMP OUT TO THE NORTH IS VERY MINIMAL FROM THE STREET AND WE'VE DEFINITELY CONSIDERED, UH, THE COMMISSION HAS AT LEAST CONSIDERED ADDITIONS LIKE THAT APPROPRIATE IN THE PAST, GIVEN THAT IT HAS SUCH A BUMP OUT.
UM, AND I'M ON SLIDE 21 NOW, JUST ONE SLIDE UP.
UM, A BUMP OUT KIND OF A BAY WINDOW SITUATION HAPPENING ON THE RIGHT SIDE HERE.
UM, I DON'T FIND THE BUMP OUT TO BE INAPPROPRIATE AND TO ME THIS IS, THIS IS REALLY THE PART AND PARCEL OF WHAT UH, STAFF IS REFERRING TO IN STIPULATION ONE.
AND, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S SOME SUPPORT ON THE COMMISSION, BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO GET A LITTLE BIT, UH, MORE COMMENTS FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON THAT ISSUE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M READY TO DO A MOTION.
UH, JUST HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR, UH, THE D R C.
UM, WAS THERE A DISCUSSION ABOUT, I'M LOOKING AT DRAWING, UH, 39 AND IT'S, UH, BASED ON A COMMENT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, SUBMITTED, UM, THAT LONG LOW SLOPED ROOF OVER, UH, A GOOD PORTION OF THE ADDITION.
WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT ROOF FORM IN D R C? UH, CHAIRMAN? I DON'T REMEMBER A DISCUSSION SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE ROOF FORM, MORE ABOUT THE, UH, THE, UH, TWO STORY PORCH FORM ITSELF.
AND I THOUGHT I DID SEE A ROOF PLAN, WASN'T THERE A ROOF PLAN SOMEWHERE? YES, THERE IS A ROOF PLAN THAT SHOWS THIS LONG, UM, LOW SLOPED ROOF.
AND, UM, MS. NORA, IS THAT THE DESIGN OF THAT ROOF FORM TO KEEP THE, UH, OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE ADDITION, UH, LOW? YES, IT IS SO THAT I CAN KEEP THAT RIDGE DOWN.
I COULD PULL THAT UP A LITTLE STEEPER TO MEET THE RIDGE.
UM, I CHOSE TO PULL THAT DOWN SO THAT IT REDUCED THE IMPACT FROM THE STREET.
I COULD MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT STEEPER, BUT YOU KNOW, I I, WHEN I DID THAT, I DIDN'T LIKE HOW IT, UH, AFFECTED THE STREET VIEW.
YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE VERY MUCH OF IT BECAUSE OF THE PERSPECTIVE AND SO FROM THE STREET, IT, IT HIGHLY REDUCES IT AND FROM THE RIVER, UM, IT IS LOW, BUT IT'S, UH, IN KEEPING WITH THE SAME SLOPE, UH, AGAIN OF OUR NEIGHBOR JUST TO KEEP THAT RHYTHM ALONG THE RI THE VIEW FROM THE RIVER, IT'S ALMOST THE SAME SLOPE AS THE NEIGHBOR.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
SO MY MOTION WAS A LITTLE BIT THAT WAY BECAUSE I'M A LITTLE BIT WORRIED ABOUT THE ROOF, UM, JUST BECAUSE WE NORMALLY ONLY HAVE PROOF METAL OR CHANGING ROOF MATERIAL IF THERE'S PROOF OF IT.
NOW I DO SEE THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY ALSO HAVING THAT METAL ROOF.
AND, AND BASED ON THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, I WOULD PROBABLY AGREE WITH THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY THAT, I MEAN WE ORIGINALLY THERE WAS THAT TYPE OF METAL ROOF.
UM, UH, MY MOTION WAS GONNA BE TO UH, JUST REMOVE THAT PART OF THE, UM, APPLICATION ON THE ROOF AND HAVE THE APPLICANT MAYBE JUST SEE IF THERE'S ANY WAY OR STAFF CAN FIND, UM, TO RESUBMIT JUST ON THE METAL ROOF AND DISCUSS THE, THE MATERIAL.
BUT IF NOT APPROVED WITH STAFF'S DEGRADATIONS TWO TO FIVE.
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE SITE.
UH, THE PHOTOS I'M SEEING DON'T SHOW ANY LANDSCAPING WHATSOEVER.
UH, WILL THE LANDSCAPE PLAN BE SUBMITTED LATER?
[02:00:01]
THIS IS CATHERINE.YES, IT WILL BE SUBMITTED LATER.
SO I SECOND COMMISSIONER GROUP'S, UH, PROPOSAL A MOTION AND THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, COMMISSIONER GROUP, THAT WAS STIPULATIONS TWO THROUGH FIVE, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? YES, CORRECT.
THE, I JUST WANNA MAKE CLEAR FOR, FOR THE APPLICANT, THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT DENYING A METAL ROOF TO SEE, YOU KNOW, THAT DISCUSSED MAYBE FURTHER AS A A ITEM BY ITSELF WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH IF THERE WASN'T, UM, A METAL ROOF OR PRESENTATION BASED ON THE, ON THE ROOF.
BUT, SO THAT WAY I CAN KEEP STEP STIPULATION NUMBER FOUR, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE A DENIAL ON, ON HER ASK FOR METAL ROOF.
COULD THAT GO THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OR DO I NEED TO GO BACK THROUGH THE BOARD FOR THAT? I, I THINK THE BEST, IF YOUR INTENTION IS TO ALLOW THEM TO COME BACK WITH MORE DETAIL ABOUT THAT AND THERE SHOULD NOT BE A STIPULATION ABOUT ROOF MATERIAL AT THIS TIME AND JUST NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT CAN RESUBMIT THOSE AS PART OF THE MATERIALS PALLET FOR CONSIDERATION.
SO LET'S DO STIPULATION TWO, FOUR AND FIVE AND ADD A STIPULATION FOR THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK WITH MORE DETAILS ON THE ROOF, UH, TO DISCUSS THE ROOF MATERIAL.
UM, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME INFORMATION ON WHAT WAS THERE ORIGINALLY.
UM, MAYBE THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY HANDLE INFORMATION AND MAYBE ALSO JUST USE, UM, OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE NEARBY STREETS THAT HAVE THE METAL ROOF SINCE IT'S SOMETHING COMMON IN THE, FOR THE, UH, KING WILLIAM NEIGHBORHOOD.
MS. COMMISSIONER
I'M SORRY IF STAFF CAN CLARIFY.
I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT IN THE FINDINGS FOR THE ROOF MATERIAL, THE 1912 SANBORN DOES SHOW THAT THE PROPERTY HAD A SHINGLE ROOF AT THE TIME, AS DID THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD, UM, BE SOMETHING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN MAKING THIS MOTION.
BUT THE APPLICANT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND WE ALREADY HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
SO ACCORDING TO THE, UH, CONSERVATION SOCIETY, WASN'T IT THAT, THAT THEY SAID THAT THE SHINGLE ROOFS WERE FINE IN 19, WE INTRODUCED IN 1910S AND THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT BEFORE.
WAS THAT NOT WHAT I UNDERSTOOD AND THAT IT COULD HAVE BEEN A, A METAL ROOF PRIOR? UM, THE COMMENTS WERE THAT YES, THEY WERE FROM THE KING WILLIAMS ASSOCI ASSOCIATION AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE SANDBORN MAPS SHOW US IS WHETHER OR NOT THE MATERIAL ON THE ROOF IS COM COMBUSTIBLE OR NOT.
UM, SOMETIMES WE CAN TELL IF THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN METAL OR CLAY OR SOME SORT OF COMPOSITE MATERIAL.
UM, BUT GENERALLY WE, WE JUST KNOW IF IT'S A SHINGLE PRODUCT OR SOMETHING ELSE BASED ON THE SANBORNS.
AND SO THEIR COMMENT WAS THAT IT'S VERY COMMON FOR OLDER HOUSES TO HAVE METAL ROOFS ORIGINALLY OR APPROPRIATELY REPLACED OVER TIME.
UM, WHAT IS NOT CLEAR IS WHAT AN ORIGINAL SHINGLE PRODUCT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND IF THE COMPOSITION SHINGLES THAT ARE THERE NOW ARE EVEN SIMILAR OR COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT WAS THEIR ORIGINAL, OH, I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS IF THEY WANNA FURTHER DISCUSS THE ROOF.
I THINK, UM, MY MOTIONS PASSED.
UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
UM, I I THINK THE METAL ROOF IS APPROPRIATE THERE.
I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION EITHER WAY.
IF WE HAVE TO RE-LITIGATE THIS DIFFERENT A DIFFERENT WAY WE CAN, IT SEEMS TO BE AN UNNECESSARILY COMPLICATING FACTOR AND I THINK THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION PROBABLY PROBABLY HAS IT.
I APPROVE WITH MOTION TWO, FOUR AND FIVE.
UM, WITHOUT ANY, MAYBE THE ONLY THING WOULD BE THE STANDARD ROOF METAL ROOF STIPULATION THAT STAFF ALWAYS PROVIDES.
ASK US A SECOND AND I SECOND THE MOTION AS AMENDED.
YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY WE ALREADY HAD A SECOND ON THE PREVIOUS MOTION, SO, SO WE NEED CARPENTER'S ACCEPTANCE OF THE ADMITTED MOTION.
ARE WE READY FOR A ROLL CALL? YES.
FERNANDEZ A STEPPED AWAY FISH.
AYE RUB COMMISSIONER CRU? THERE YOU GO.
CAN YOU DO IT ONE MORE TIME? I JUST DON'T THINK THE AUDIO CAME THROUGH.
[02:05:01]
MOTION CARRIE.OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, WE UM, WE ARE VERY CLOSE TO SOLVING OUR TECH ISSUES, BUT IT MIGHT CAUSE SOME INTERRUPTION.
SO I, UH, PROPOSE THAT WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
UM, IF EVERYONE JUST STAYS MUTED, UM, WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT AND THEN WE'LL RECONVENE IN FIVE MINUTES.
UM, SORRY FOR THE INTERRUPTION.
UM, WE ARE MOVING ON TO ITEM 20,
[20-3767 Address/Description: 2015 BROADWAY HDRC Case No.: 2020-247 RIO District: RIO-1 Applicant: Wesley Putman/Budget Signs Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 1]
UM, 20, 20 15 BROADWAY.EDWARD, ARE YOU READY? YES, I'M READY.
AND I'M HERE WITH THE APPLICANT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 20 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 47 20 15 BROADWAY.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL SIGNAGE AT 2015 BROADWAY.
WITHIN THIS REQUEST, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED THE FOLLOWING, ONE TO INSTALL ONE BUILDING MOUNTED BLADE SIGN TO READ EMERGENCY AND 24 7 TO FEATURE AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET IN AN OVERALL WIDTH OF 30 INCHES FOR A TOTAL SIZE FOR APPROXIMATELY 30 SQUARE FEET, COUNTING BOTH SIDES.
THIS SIGN WOULD FEATURE AN INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CABINET AND TWO TO INSTALL ONE GROUND MOUNT MONUMENT SIGN TO FEATURE AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, SIX INCHES IN AN OVERALL WIDTH OF TWO FEET FOR A TOTAL SIZE OF APPROXIMATELY 24 SQUARE FEET COUNTING BOTH SIDES.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A, EXCUSE ME, BASED ON FINDINGS B THROUGH C OR B THROUGH E.
I HAVE THE APPLICANT WEST HERE ON THE LINE.
YES, MY NAME IS WESLEY PUTMAN.
UH, BUDGET SIGNS 28 0 1 WEST AVENUE, SANTO TEXAS REPRESENTING THE EMERGENCY CLINIC AT THE PEARL.
UM, BASICALLY, UH, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR HERE IS, UH, THE, THE CUSTOMER, UH, DOES NOT HAVE ANY VISIBILITY WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING NORTH AND SOUTH UP AND DOWN, UH, BROADWAY.
AND SO THEY'RE TRYING TO FIND ANY TYPE OF SOLUTION THAT THAT STAFF OR, UH, THE BOARD CAN RECOMMEND FOR US TO, UH, ADVERTISE THE WORD EMERGENCY.
YOU BASICALLY HAVE TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE, RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE LOCATION BEFORE THE PUBLIC REALIZES, HEY, THIS IS A 24 HOUR EMERGENCY CENTER.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE BASICALLY HERE, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO SAY, HEY, WHAT CAN WE DO, UH, IN THIS, UH, SITUATION.
UH, WE REALIZE IT'S NOT, IT'S UNIQUE TO THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT A TYPICAL RETAIL LOCATION THAT'S SIGNAGE RESTRICTIONS AND STUFF.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SEE, UH, WHAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH.
MR. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
THERE ARE TWO SIGNS THAT ARE PRESENTED TO US, RIGHT? I'M, I'M WONDERING WHY, WHY, UM, Y Y'ALL DIDN'T CONSIDER THE SIZE OF THE SIGN THAT'S ON THE FLOOR, THAT'S ON THE GROUND OR THE SIGN THAT IS VERTICAL ON THE BUILDING.
IT SEEMS THAT THE SIGN ON THE BUILDING IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE BECAUSE IT, BECAUSE IT, IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S NOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, COME BY SOMETHING FROM US.
IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S IT'S EMERGENCY SERVICES, BUT THE SIGN JUST SEEMS TO BE SO OUTTA SCALE WITH THE BUILDING.
AND IF THE PURPOSE IS FOR THE PEOPLE DRIVING, UH, NORTH TO SOUTH TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT ILLUMINATED IT, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE CERTAIN SURE.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THAT BIG OF A SIGN.
WELL, AND, AND WE WERE, YEAH, AND I AND, AND WE ARE IN TOTAL, UM, WOULD BE, AND BASICALLY I, I DID WHAT MY CUSTOMER HAD ASKED ME TO DO, BUT I AM IN A TOTAL AGREEMENT, UH, THAT WE COULD CERTAINLY LIVE WITH THE ACTUAL, UH, THE TWO FOOT SIGN THAT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT TWO BY SIX IF YOU WOULD, UM, INSTEAD OF THE, UH, 30 BY SEVEN, UH, OR YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE, UH, I THINK WE COULD GET THAT THROUGH THE CLIENT AT NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER.
I WOULD BE IN TOTAL AGREEANCE.
UM, IF WE CONSIDER THE BLADE SIGN, UH, WHICH SAYS EMERGENCY 24 7, WOULD THE APPLICANT BE WILLING TO REMOVE THE OPEN 24 HOUR SIGN THAT'S ALREADY THERE BECAUSE YOU'RE BASICALLY REPEATING THE INFORMATION AND THEN, AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION IS, UH, KEYING ON WHAT COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ HAD SAID, IF THE, IF THE VERTICAL DIMENSION OF THAT, UH, BLADE SIGN WAS, UH, SHORTER, UM, POSSIBLY NO TALLER THAN THE, THE BUILDING ITSELF, UM, WOULD Y'ALL BE CON WOULD Y'ALL CONSIDER, UH, THOSE UH, MODIFICATIONS?
[02:10:03]
OH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE, UH, ABSOLUTELY.IT'D BE OKAY IF WE, IF IF WE MOVE REMOVED 24 7 AND AND KEPT IT AT THE ROOF LEVEL.
I ACTUALLY ACTUALLY WOULD AGREE WITH, WITH THE, THE BOARD THAT I THINK THAT WOULD ACTUALLY LOOK BETTER.
UM, I, I'M JUST, I ARE, IS THERE STILL A REQUEST FOR BOTH OF BOTH THE MONUMENT SIGN AND THE BLADE SIGN? OR DID WE ALREADY, DID YOU ALREADY CONCEDE THE MONUMENT SIGN? UH, NATURALLY THE CUSTOMER WOULD LIKE TO HAVE BOTH.
UM, BUT I MEAN, I'M NOT GONNA FIGHT, UH, A LOSING BATTLE.
UM, UH, THEY, THEY NEED, THEY NEED SOMETHING.
UM, IF, IF WE COULD GET DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE SERVICES RENDERED, IT WOULD BE NICE IF THEY COULD HAVE BOTH, BUT I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE DEPTH OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.
SO
I MEAN THEY, THE ISSUE HERE IS REALLY, UM, THAT THERE'S, IT'S, IT'S MAXED OUT ON SIGNAGE.
THE, THE IDEA OF, UH, REMOVING THE OPEN 24 HOURS, UH, TEXT AND, UH, PROVIDING A, A BLADE SIGN THAT I SUPPOSE WOULD BE CENTERED ON THAT VERTICAL ELEMENT, UH, IN BETWEEN THE AMBULANCE SIGN AND THE OTHER SIGN I COULD GET ON BOARD WITH.
BUT I, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK I CAN ALSO SUPPORT A MONUMENT SIGN.
ALSO, THERE'S JUST, IT'S A LOT OF SIGNAGE.
WE'VE GOT AMBULANCE, WE'VE GOT OPEN 24 HOURS, WE'VE GOT EMERGENCY CLINIC, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THESE, THE SIGNS AREN'T WORKING WELL FOR, FOR THE TENANT.
AND, UM, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.
UH, I, I CAN SUPPORT A BLADE SIGN THAT THAT'S, UH, NO TALLER THAN THE BUILDING AND IT'S HARD TO ESTIMATE WHAT HEIGHT WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE JUST KIND OF OFFHAND.
UM, BUT I, I'M, I'VE GOT SOME CONCERNS ABOUT IT BEING INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED AND I'D LIKE TO GET SOME THOUGHTS FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.
I ACTUALLY USED THIS FACILITY ON MONDAY AND I HAD NO PROBLEM FINDING IT.
UM, I, I ASSUMED THAT THE CLINIC IS OPEN.
I HAD NO PROBLEM FINDING IT AND I WAS THERE ON MONDAY.
I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER FISH.
UH, MONUMENT SIGN IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE, I MEAN, FIND IN NEAR THIS TYPE OF PROPERTY.
SO MONUMENT SIGN IS, IS FOR SURE OUT OF THE QUESTION ALSO FOR ME, AND I WOULD SUPPORT THE BLADE SIGN.
I THINK THAT STAFF, WE COULD PROBABLY JUST IN THE STIPULATION RELATION, YOU KNOW, PUT SOMETHING THAT THEY JUST COME BACK WITH STAFF FOR THE FINAL DESIGN TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS WITHIN THE ROOF LINE.
UM, WE HAVE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A PROPERTY ACROSS THE CORNER OR I DON'T KNOW, WHERE'S CATTY CORNER, THE C V S, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER THIS, BUT WE ALSO PROVE SOME BLADE SIGNS ON BOTH SIDES.
UM, AND ACTUALLY I WENT BY TWO, UM, AFTER I WENT TO THE EMERGENCY CLINIC AND, AND I FEEL LIKE THAT WAS A LOT OF SIGNAGE ALREADY.
SO I MEAN, UM, IF THE APPLICANT, IT SEEMS LIKE THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT, WHAT WOULD BE THE TOTAL FOOTAGE OF SIGNAGE IF WE REMOVE THE MONUMENT, REDUCE THE, UH, SIGN AND, AND KEEP THE SIGNS THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE? WHAT WOULD THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE BE THEN? UM, I BELIEVE, UM, LET'S, LET'S SAY WE REMOVE THE MONUMENT AND WE REDUCE THE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE EMERGENCY ROOM.
LET'S SAY WE MAKE THAT A TWO FOOT BY SIX FOOT AND KEEP IT BELOW THE ROOF LINE.
I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BRING OUR TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE UP TO ABOUT, I THINK WE'RE AT 66.
I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S ENCOMPASSING THE AMBULANCE AND THE WORD PATIENT.
UM, AS FAR AS THAT'S COUNTING AN 18 SQUARE FOOT CROSS, WHICH I MEAN REALLY THE, THE ONLY ACTUAL VERBIAGE IS 26 SQUARE FEET THAT SAYS THE EMERGENCY ROOM AT THE CLINIC, THE AMBULANCE AND THE PATIENT SIGN ARE SOMETHING THE STATE LAW REQUIRES.
UM, SO YOU KNOW, THEY THAT, BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE'D BE ABOUT 16, UH, 66.
I FEEL LIKE WE'RE GONNA BE LESS, I THINK WE'RE GONNA BE AROUND THE 60 BECAUSE I, THE BLADE SUN WOULD PROBABLY BE CUT IN HALF THE SIZE.
AND ACCORDING TO YOUR, WHAT I AM SEEING WAS THAT THE BLADE SUN WAS GONNA BE SEVEN FEET AND, AND BASED ON THE IMAGE, I FEEL LIKE IT WAS GONNA BE LIKE MORE LIKE A TWO BY FOUR.
I WAS, IN MY MIND, I WAS MORE THINKING THAT WE WERE GONNA BE AROUND THE 60, WHICH I WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE APPRO.
DO, DO YOU THINK THAT THIS VELASQUE I DO THINK THAT WE, WE SHOULD, UH, BE BE ALSO, UM, UM, ADAMANT ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF THE 24 HOUR.
'CAUSE THEN, THEN IT'S GONNA BE, UM,
[02:15:01]
A LOT OF CONFUSION AS OPPOSED TO CLEAR, CLEAR SIGNAGE.SO THE BLADE SIGN, BUT THAT'S REMOVING THE OPEN 24 HOURS SINCE THE BLADE SIGN WILL SAY 24 7.
SO I I I, I'D BE HAPPY TO TELL THE CUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
LET'S, LET'S, UH, ELIMINATE THE, THE MONUMENT SIGN ELIMINATE 24 7.
I BELIEVE THAT YOU SHOULD PROBABLY, UH, TO KEEP IN DESIGN TO WHERE IT WOULD LOOK APPROPRIATE IS IF YOU LOOK ON THE, ON THE PICTURE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW, WHERE IT SAYS THE EMERGENCY CLINIC BY THE PEARL IS, LET'S MAKE THE, IF WE COULD MAKE THE BLADE SIGN TO BE EQUAL WITH THE WORD PEARL TO EQUAL TO THE WORD THE, AND, AND WHATEVER THAT HEIGHT IS, WHICH I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT, UH, FIVE AND A HALF FEET, UH, AND THEN APPROPRIATENESS TO GET THE WORD, YOU KNOW, NO MORE THAN TWO BY FIVE AND A HALF FEET.
I THINK THAT WOULD LOOK THE BEST.
UM, AND THEN I THINK THAT, I MEAN, I THINK WE COULD GO WITH THAT, IF THAT WOULD PLEASE THE BOARD COMMISSIONER GROOVE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GETTING THERE.
DO YOU WANNA TRY TO CRAFT THAT INTO A MOTION? I'M JUST TRYING TO PULL UP, UH, THE, THE CASE THERE.
UM, YOU COULD, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THAT LAST, MORE OF THE STRAIGHT ON VERSION OF THE PHOTO.
WELL, I WAS GONNA SAY, I MOVED TO APPROVE.
SO ITEM ONE WITH THE STIPULATION, UM, AS, AS APPLICANT WAS SAYING, NO, NOT ABOVE THE WORD THIRD AND NOT ABOVE THE, UH, NOT BELOW THE WORD PEARL.
AND ITEM NUMBER TWO, UH, DENIAL.
I WOULD
OH, LET ME JUST ADD THE STIPULATION THAT PPLICANT STAFF FINAL DESIGN OF ITEM NUMBER ONE.
AND I'D LIKE TO OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THAT.
UH, TO REMOVE THE, THE SIGN IN WHITE THAT SAYS OPEN 24 HOURS.
THAT WOULD CONFLICT WITH THE BLADE SIGN, CORRECT? A MINUTE.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE FISH? AYE.
I APPRECIATE THE, Y'ALL WORKING WITH US.
[20-3760 Address/Description: 2115 W GRAMERCY PLACE HDRC Case No.: 2020-172 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: Mark Reina/Alamo City Construction & Supply LLC. Request: Front porch modifications City Council Dist.: 7 ]
SO WE'RE MOVING TO ITEM 21, WHICH IS 2115 WEST GRAMERCY.RACHEL, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I AM.
AGENDA ITEM 21, H C R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 1 72 ADDRESS, 2115 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, INSTALL A NEW PORCH ROOF, TWO WRAP THE EXISTING METAL PORCH, SUPPORTS WITH WOOD TO CREATE SQUARE COLUMNS.
THREE FOR NEW CEMENT TOPPING ON FORK LANDING AND STEPS.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH E.
AND AS A CASE COMMENT, THIS, UH, REQUEST WAS PREVIOUSLY HEARD AT THE MAY 20TH H D R C, WHERE IT WAS REFERRED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS SINCE, UH, UPDATED THE APPLICATIONS TO REFLECT D R C SUGGESTIONS.
AND I DO HAVE, UH, THE OWNER GI AND THE APPLICANT MARK ON THE LINE.
SO THIS IS GIL AND I'M HERE WITH MARK, MS. MARK RAY WITH AMO CITY.
UM, WERE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE? WERE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME? YES, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UM, JUST TO GIVE YOU A QUICK REPORT ON THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE, I, WE, UH, MET WITH THE APPLICANT AND HAD A DISCUSSION.
REALLY, UM, I'M NOT SURE IT, UH, IT WENT ALL THAT FAR AS FAR AS THE, UM, THE EXISTING, UH, PORCH IS CONCERNED.
'CAUSE WE, WE JUST DON'T KNOW.
IT'S PRO PROVENANCE AND, UH, I WOULD SUSPECT AT LEAST A PORTION OF IT IS, IS ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING.
UM, AND THEN THERE WAS THE SUGGESTION, UH, OF ADDING A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, I GUESS VISUAL WEIGHTINESS TO THE, THE BEAM THAT CONNECTS THE TWO COLUMNS ON EITHER SIDE
[02:20:01]
OF THE, UH, THE ROOF STRUCTURE TO KIND OF GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, SUBSTANCE, A LITTLE BIT MORE BALANCE IN KEEPING WITH, UM, SOME OF THE, UH, ROOF STRUCTURES THAT WE SEE, UH, ON SOME OF THE PORCHES IN, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.UM, AND I'M TRYING TO FIND WHERE YOUR, YOUR REVISED PROPOSAL IS FOR THAT.
IS THAT, HAVE YOU ALL GONE TO A FLAT ROOF ON THAT? UH, NO.
SO WHAT IS, WHAT IS ON THE SCREEN NOW IS THE REVISED PROPOSAL THAT IS THE REVISED, THIS IS COMMISSIONER GRU.
UM, MY HOUSE IS ONE OF THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU'RE USING.
UH, I THINK THAT, I THINK I AM THE ONE WHO SENT IT TO D R C BECAUSE I DO FIND THAT A LOT OF THE HOUSES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD DO HAVE A, A FRONT PORCH, UM, SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU'RE INTRODUCING RIGHT NOW.
UM, AND I DON'T KNOW, UH, I WASN'T AT THE D R C, BUT I CAN SEE THAT BASED ON THE PICTURES YOU'LL FIND, UM, WHAT COULD BE A, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING I, AND I MEAN, I, I AGREE WITH STAFF ACCEPT IT BECAUSE WE CAN'T FIND PROOF.
AND I ALSO AGREE THAT WHAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE IS NOT, UM, YOU WANT SOMETHING BIGGER.
IS THIS REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR? UM, I FIND THAT MOST OF THE PROPERTIES AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE THE COLUMNS GOING DOWN TO THE GROUND LEVEL, AND THEN THE STEPS ARE CLOSER TO THE DOOR.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT D R C? THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH WHO WAS ALSO AT THE D R C MEETING.
UM, THE, THE EXISTING FRONT PORCH THAT KIND OF HAS A SCALLOP SHAPE IS QUITE SMALL.
AND, UH, THE PROPOSED FOOTPRINT OF THE REVISED FRONT PORCH, I BELIEVE IS VER ROUGHLY THE SAME SCALE.
UH, IT MIGHT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SCALE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, THAT SORT OF EFFECT.
BUT GENERALLY WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING HERE IS, UH, IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS WHAT WE CAN SEE ON THE, ON THE SCREEN, UH, JUST SQUARED OFF ON THE CORNERS.
AND THERE WERE KIND OF TWO PARTS, UH, TWO PARTS TO THE CONVERSATION.
AND I THINK LAST TIME WHEN WE HAD HEARD THIS AT THE, AT THE COMMISSION, THERE WASN'T MUCH OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED DESIGN.
THERE WAS SOME CONSTERNATION AND INVESTIGATION INTO, UH, THE, THE SIGNIFICANCE OR THE INTEGRITY OR, UH, THE IMPORTANCE OF THE, THE FRONT PORCH AS IT EXISTS.
AND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER WAS IN THAT D R C ALSO, AND WE KIND OF, WE KIND OF FELL ON, ON THE ISSUES.
WE, WE CAN'T REALLY TELL FOR SURE IF IT'S ORIGINAL.
IT'S OUT OF CHARACTER, UH, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS IT EXISTS, AND IT'S NOT NECESSARILY IN THE CHARACTER OF THE STYLE OF THE HOUSE.
UM, SO WHETHER OR NOT IT, IT WAS ORIGINAL, WE FELT THAT THE, UH, THAT THE PROPOSAL WAS MORE OR LESS APPROPRIATE.
AND I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, CORRECT ME IF I, I'M WRONG, BUT I I THINK THE, THE, UH, D R C WAS IN SUPPORT.
AND YOU CAN SEE HERE IN THE, UH, IMAGE THAT'S ON YOUR SCREEN WHERE THEY HAVE, UH, THICKENED UP THE BEAM MM-HMM.
I THINK THE, UH, IT, IT WAS JUST FEELING PROPORTIONATELY A LITTLE, LITTLE THIN THERE.
AND, AND GOING BACK TO, UM, WHETHER THAT EXISTING PORCH IS IN CHARACTER WITH THE HOUSE, YOU'LL NOTICE THE HOUSE HAS, UH, LIKE WRAPPING WINDOWS OF THE CORNERS AND THERE'S SOME KIND OF STREAMLINE ELEMENTS TO IT.
IT IS DEFINITELY A TRANSITIONAL PIECE.
UM, AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN GENERAL, THERE'S SOME, UH, INTERESTING HYBRIDIZED UH, STYLISTIC EXPLORATIONS GOING ON.
BUT, UH, I THINK WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS, IS APPROPRIATE AND IS, UH, IS OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE, WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
NOW, WHETHER THE COLUMNS SHOULD GO TO THE GROUND OR NOT, UM, I I DON'T KNOW IF, IF THAT REALLY IMPROVES IT OR MORE
I, I JUST, UM, YOU KNOW, AT THE, AT THE RISK OF, OF NOT BEING SURE RIGHT, OF, OF, OF WHAT WAS
[02:25:01]
THERE AT A, THERE'S A PERIOD WHEN THE, THE, UH, CLEAN PIPE WAS GEOMETRIC SHAPES, AND THEN KIND OF THE OPEN CORNERS WHERE THE, WHERE THE CORNER DISAPPEARS IN WINDOW, IT SEEMS LIKE THEY WERE TRYING AT THE TIME, IF THAT'S ORIGINAL RIGHT, TO, TO MOVE TOWARD A, A, A GERMAN MODERNISM.BUT THEN THE, THE BLINDS ON THE SIDES OF THE WINDOWS KIND OF THROW IT ALL OFF.
SO TO DETERMINE WHAT IS ORIGINAL, WHAT'S NOT ORIGINAL, OR WHAT THE INTENT OF THE DESIGN IS, IN FACT THAT YOU SEE NO SLOPE ON THE ROOF.
AND THEN THE KIND OF MODERN FIREPLACE, I I I, I ECHO FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, I THINK IT CAN, IT CAN GO EITHER WAY.
UM, BUT I DO THINK IT'S A SIGNIFICANT ALTERATION TO SOMETHING THAT MIGHT, MIGHT, MIGHT BE A STATEMENT OF A PARTICULAR PERIOD OR SOMEONE AT LEAST ATTEMPTING TO, TO DO SOMETHING MODERN.
WHO KNOWS, MAYBE THEY DID PROPOSE SOMETHING MODERN AT THE TIME AND DIDN'T HAVE THE COURAGE TO DO THAT AND ENDED UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WAS HALFWAY BETWEEN TWO WORLDS.
BUT JUST TO WANNA MAKE A COMMENT FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, AND I WOULD ECHO SOME OF MY, UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ'S COMMENTS ABOUT, UH, THE INTERNATIONAL STYLE, UM, SIMPLICITY OF THE FRONT OF THIS HOUSE.
UM, FROM THE PHOTOS, I DO NOT SEE WHERE A, UH, A PITCHED OR GABLE ROOF WOULD'VE BEEN FLASHED INTO THE BRICK.
UH, THERE'S NO, UH, LINES WHERE FLASHING MIGHT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED, UH, IF IT HAD HAD A SLOPED ROOF.
UM, AND SO MY, UH, GUT FEELING IS THAT THIS WAS PROBABLY ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE.
UH, THE SHUTTERS THAT ARE ON THE HOUSE ARE, WOULD BE, MY GUESS WOULD BE ARE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE.
AND I THINK, UM, NOT HAVING THE SHUTTERS WOULD, UH, HELP WITH READING OF THE, THIS TRANSITIONAL STYLE.
UM, AND I WOULD PERSONALLY, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF RESTORING THIS PORCH, UM, AS IS I WOULD, I COULD, UH, THE LOWER TWO STEPS, WHICH HAVE LOOK LIKE THEY HAVE SETTLED, AND THEREFORE YOU HAVE, UH, IRREGULAR RISERS BETWEEN THE THREE, UH, STEPS.
I WOULD, UH, SUPPORT REPORTING THOSE, UH, STEPS SO THAT YOU HAVE EQUAL RISERS SO THAT IT IS A, UH, A SAFER CONDITION.
BUT I WOULD ADVOCATE THAT THEY BE IN THE, THE, UH, CIRCULAR PATTERN TO MATCH WHAT'S HERE.
CHAIRMAN FETZER, LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING.
D DOES IT APPEAR THAT THIS MAY HAVE BEEN A PLASTERED HOUSE THAT BECAUSE THE BRICK, THE, I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THAT STYLISTICALLY IF YOU WERE DOING RETRO, UH, THAT YOU MIGHT MAKE THAT HAPPEN, BUT THAT'S ALREADY AN OLD BUILDING.
SO TO SEE THE, THE, THE OUTPOURING OF, OF PLASTER SHADOW OR, OR STUCCO SHADOW, IT THEN WOULD MAKE SENSE IF, IF THE SHUTTERS WERE GONE, THE PLACE WAS, LET'S SAY IT WAS WHITE AND HAD THIS REAL SUBTLE, UH, UH, ENTRY STATEMENT.
I CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHY THE BRICK IS ALL WHITE THE WAY THAT IT IS THAT I COULD NOT SPEAK TO WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, A FIRSTHAND, UH, INSPECTION OF THE PROPERTY.
THE FACT THAT, SO I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IT'S REALLY NOT, UM, I THINK PROBABLY VERY UNIQUE, UH, ENTRYWAY FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THE REASON ALSO, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS FOUND MANY EXAMPLES OF, UM, A GABLE ENTRANCE AND, AND, AND THAT, I THINK THAT'S BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE, YOU KNOW, THE TENANTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS.
I, I DON'T MIND SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION AS THE, UH, APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED.
UM, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED COMMISSIONER GROUPS.
SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FISH? AYE GIBBS? AYE.
[02:30:03]
NAYYY ROBE? AYE.OMAN, NAYYY BETTS NAY LA AYE THAT IS FIVE TO FOUR.
[20-3773 Address/Description: 619 DAWSON ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-220 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Anahita Moshgbar Bakhshayeshi/Moshgbar Anahita Request: Construction of a 1.5 story residential structure City Council Dist.: 2 ]
DAWSON, DO WE HAVE EDWARD? YES, I'M HERE WITH THE APPLICANT.AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER 22 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 26 19 DAWSON, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A ONE AND A HALF STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON THE VACANT LIFE AT SIX 19.
DAWSON LOCATED WITHIN THE DIGNITY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS.
A THROUGH Q STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING PRIOR TO RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
ONE, THAT A SETBACK THAT IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY ON THE BLOCK SHOULD BE USED AS NOTED IN FINDING C TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT MODIFIED THE PROPOSED MASK FORM TO BE PROPO PROPORTIONATELY ACCURATE RATHER THAN READING AS A ONE STORY STRUCTURE WITH AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF APPROXIMATELY 21 FEET.
THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED A FOUNDATION HEIGHT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AND NOTES FOUND HISTORICALLY ON THE BLOCK IS NOTED IN FINDING F FOURTH, DECIDING FEATURE AND EXPOSURE OF FOUR INCHES.
A, A SMOOTH FINISH, A THICKNESS OF APPROXIMATELY THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH AND LIGHTER CORNERS.
ADDITIONALLY, THE STANDING SEA METAL ROOF SHOULD FEATURE PANELS THAT ARE 18 TO 21 INCHES WIDE.
SEEMS THAT ARE ONE TO TWO INCH AND HEIGHT A STANDARD GAL BALLOON FINISH EITHER A CRIMP RIDGE SEAM OR A LOW PROFILE RIDGE CAP FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED WINDOWS THAT MEET STAFF STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WINDOWS IN NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SIX, THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED APPROPRIATE PORCH MASSING IS NOTED IN FINDING M SEVEN THAT THE APPLICANT MODIFIED THE PROPOSED LOT ARRANGEMENT AS TO NOT FEATURE A FRONT YARD PARKING CONDITION, AS NOTED IN FINDING O AND EIGHT THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT A DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT NOTES LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF LANDSCAPING MATERIALS AND NOTES, THE SCREENING OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT.
AND THERE'S ALSO TWO CASE COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO A FOUNDATION SETBACK INSPECTION AND A STANDING SUIT METAL ROOF INSPECTION.
UM, ADD THE APPLICANT ON A HTA ON THE LINE, UM, ON A HTA.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO, UH, WALK THE COMMISSION THROUGH YOUR, UM, DESIGN AND PRESENTATION NOW? HELLO.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GIVING ME YOUR TIME TODAY.
UM, THIS IS ON SO MUCH FOR, UM, FOR THE, UM, PROPERTY, UM, PROPOSED PROPERTY OF SIX 19,000 STREET.
UM, THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO, UH, BE A FAMILY HOUSE AND, UM, SO ALL THE FEATURES THAT IT HAS OR THE FEATURES THAT IS, UH, TASK TO BE, UM, APPROPRIATE FOR US AND ALSO TASK TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAMILIES WHO PROBABLY GONNA MOVE IN NEXT TO US MAYBE AFTER DECADES.
SO, UM, UM, I CAN GO THROUGH THE PLAN, UM, OR I CAN GO THROUGH THE, UM, THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, AND, UM, UM, THE PLAN HAS BEEN BASICALLY ABOUT, UM, UH, HOW THAT IS ONE STORY AND IT HAS TWO CEILING HEIGHTS.
UM, ONE CEILING HEIGHT IS LIKE A 12 FOOT CEILING HEIGHT THAT IS FOR MANY OF THE HOUSES IN THAT AREA.
UH, THIS WAS THE KIND OF LIKE A CEILING HEIGHT THAT, UM, WERE CONSIDERED.
AND I, UH, WE, UH, HAVE IT IN THIS HOUSE ON THE PLACES THAT ARE, UH, MORE LIKE FORMAL AREAS AND LIKE, LIKE THE DINING ROOM, LIKE LIVING ROOM, LIKE, UH, THE INTERIOR, BASICALLY THE PLACES THAT, UM, ARE LIKE PRESENTABLE TO, UM, IF WE HAVE I GUEST OR LIKE, UM, PLACES AS SUCH.
AND THE, UH, AREAS THAT ARE MORE PRIVATE, LIKE, UM, BEDROOMS AND, UM, FAMILY ROOM AND KITCHEN, UH, THOSE TYPE OF AREAS HAVE A EIGHT FOOT CEILING.
AND THESE GAVE US, UM, A VERY, UH, GOOD AREA LIKE, UM, AN OFFICE LIKE IN THE ATTIC AREA TO CONVERT IT TO TWO ROOMS THAT IS LIKE, UM, AN OFFICE AND A GUEST BEDROOM.
SO IF THEY ARE SAYING THAT IT'S A KIND OF LIKE A ONE AND HALF A STORY HOUSE OR LIKE IF IT LOOKS LIKE A ONE STORY FROM OUTSIDE FROM THE STREET, UH, THAT IS BECAUSE, UH, OF THIS REASON.
[02:35:01]
THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, I, UM, SUBMITTED, UM, MANY OF THEM, UM, AND I FIXED THEM LIKE, UH, BEFORE SUBMITTING THIS.UM, AND UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T SEE THAT IN THE, UM, IN THE AGENDA RIGHT NOW.
UM, LIKE I TRY TO LIKE FIX THE WINDOWS AND THE MATERIAL AND, UH, I REMOVE THE, UH, FRONT YARD, UM, PARKING.
UM, AND, UM, THERE ARE JUST, UM, A FEW THINGS THAT, UH, WE PROBABLY HAVE TO GO THROUGH.
LIKE ONE OF THEM IS THE SETBACK THAT, UH, THIS HOUSE HAS, UM, IS ADJUSTED TO THE, UM, TWO, UM, HOUSES AND ANOTHER HOUSE LIKE RIGHT NEXT TO THEM, WHICH, UH, GIVES IT LIKE DIFFERENT VARI VARIATIVE SETBACKS.
AND, UM, BASED ON THE GUIDE GUIDELINES, UH, I WOULD SAY THAT USE THE MEDIAN SETBACK OF BUILDINGS ALONG THE STREET, UH, IF THE VARI VARI OF SETBACKS EXIST.
UM, AND ALSO, UM, THE MAIN BUILDING AND MAIN STRUCTURE IS, UM, ALONG WITH THE ADJUSTING HOUSES AND, UH, THE PORCH IS, UM, COMING, UH, LIKE FORWARD, UH, WHERE, UM, I THINK THE MILLION OF THE SETBACK IS.
AND, UM, PLUS THERE'S A TREE IN THE BACK, UH, THAT, UM, LIKE IF I MOVE THE HOUSE, PROBABLY IT WOULD BE FIVE FOOT, UH, BACK, IT'LL BE IN THE PROPERTY OF THE TREE.
SO, UM, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I PREFER NOT TO DO BECAUSE I THINK LIKE THERE ARE, UM, TWO DIFFERENT SETBACKS HERE.
UM, AND I, I THINK, UH, THE PLACEMENT OF THE HOME, UM, CAN BE JUSTIFIED IN THIS WAY.
AND, UM, THE OTHER THING ABOUT THE, UM, I THINK WAS ABOUT THE PORCH AND ABOUT THE MATERIALS USED ON THE PORCH, LIKE THE LURE, UM, ON THE SIDE OF THE PORCH.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, UH, THE LOUVER BESIDE THE PORCH WAS, UM, ABOUT THE, UM, LIKE HERE AGAIN, THE GUIDELINE IS WRITTEN, UH, THAT ALTERNATIVE USE OF TRADITIONAL MATERIAL CONSIDERING USING TRADITIONAL MATERIALS SUCH AS WOOD SIDING IN A NEW WAY TO PROVIDE VISUAL INTEREST.
I PUT THOSE FOR, UM, CONTRIBUTING LIKE PLANTING AND LIKE, UM, LIKE, UH, GROWING PLANTING ON THOSE AREAS BECAUSE, UM, THIS, THIS IS A KIND OF LIKE A HOUSE THAT WE DESIRE TO HAVE.
AND, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, WE DON'T HAVE SO MUCH, UM, WE ARE LIVING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY AND THIS IS LIKE IN THE MOST METROPOLITAN AREA OF THIS, UM, SAN ANTONIO.
AND IF YOU ARE SITTING ON A, THIS IS A SENTIMENTAL LIKE, UM, UM, APPROACH TO THAT.
BUT IF WE ARE SITTING ON THE FRONT PORCH, WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE AS MUCH AS, UH, LIKE A NATURE AS WE CAN, UM, HAVE.
SO THOSE ARE BASICALLY JUST CONSIDER FOR HAVING, UM, LIKE, UM, GROWING, PLANTING ALL, ALL OVER THEM, CLIMBING PLANTS ALL OVER THEM.
AND THEN THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT IS, UM, IS BASED ON OUR DESIRE AND BASED ON OUR, UM, LIKE, UM, INTEREST.
AND EVEN IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, THERE'S A PORCH THAT, UH, THE CANOPY OF THE PORCH IS ONLY, THE SHADE OF A TREE IS LIKE A BIG TREE THAT WE, UM, UH, WE DECIDED TO KEEP AND WE KIND OF RESPECTED, UM, LIKE THE NATURAL, LIKE, UH, COVERAGE OF THE LAND.
UM, AND UH, ALSO IT HAS A OVERALL PORCH ALL OVER THE, UM, UH, FRONT, UH, THAT IN THE MAIN, UM, DESIGN, IT WAS, UM, COMING, UM, FROM THE DOOR TO THE, UM, LEFT WHERE TWO WINDOWS EXIST.
AND, UM, IT WAS, UM, THE, THE REASON WAS THAT WE PREFERRED IT THAT WAY BECAUSE THE ONE, THE ONE ALONE WINDOW IS A WINDOW OF A BEDROOM AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE AN EASY ACCESS TO THE WINDOW OF THE, UH, BEDROOM FROM OUTSIDE.
AND IF WE GO AND, UH, WE ALSO REMOVED THE DRIVEWAY.
AND, UM, I ALSO, UH, SUBMITTED NEW, UM, MATERIAL, UM, SPECIFICATIONS, UM, AND WINDOWS, UM, FOR FIXING THE, UH, ISSUES THAT WE HAD.
AND I THINK THAT'S, UM, MUCH AS I CAN THINK ABOUT RIGHT NOW.
[02:40:01]
PUBLIC COMMENTS? WE DO.UM, THE FIRST IS FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DENIAL OF CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL.
PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION DESIGN IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE SORT PATTERNS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE FRONT PORCH NEEDS TO HAVE A PROPER USABLE DEPTH IN COLUMNS THAT DELINEATE THIS PORCH IN A WAY THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH, COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORICAL NORM.
UM, THE SECOND COMES FROM SCOTT ALBERT ON BEHALF OF SEVERAL NEIGHBORS.
UM, WE SUPPORT O H P WHILE THE COMPOSITION OF THE FRONT FACADE IS REMINISCENT OF A MID-CENTURY MODERN HOUSE, THE SCALE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS AND FORMS ARE NOT, NOR ARE THEY CONSISTENT WITH OTHER HISTORIC STRUCTURES IN THE DISTRICT.
WE ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER USING HISTORIC FORMS, COMPOSITION AND SCALE FOUND IN THE CONTEXT AREA TO CREATE A HOME THAT IS CONGRUENT WITH THE EXISTING HOUSES ON THE BLOCK.
AND THOSE ARE THE TWO LETTERS WE HAVE.
HAS THIS BEEN TO D R C, THIS COMMISSIONER GROUP? THIS HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE, UM, STAFF HAS IT RIGHT ON THIS ONE.
UM, ALSO WITH THE STIPULATIONS AND I'M, THERE MAY BE, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS FURTHER IN, IN D R C TO MAKE UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT SOME OF THESE STIPULATIONS BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE FAIRLY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FRONT COURT.
THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
I, I RECALL THAT WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE REVISED DOCUMENTS EITHER.
AND JUST A NOTE TO THE APPLICANT, UM, WE, WE HAVE SOME PRETTY FINITE CUTOFF PERIODS, UH, AS FAR AS, UH, ACCEPTING, UH, LATE SUBMITTALS.
SO THAT MIGHT BE WHY, UH, WHY AREN'T HERE.
SO I I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT IT TO
I, I WILL NOTE FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, UM, SO THERE ARE COMMENTS THAT STAFF PROVIDED THE APPLICANT WITH THAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.
SO, UM, MAINLY THOSE PERTAINING TO, UM, AND MAYBE JUST FOR CLARITY, I'LL GO THROUGH STAFF STIPULATIONS OR AT LEAST SOME OF THEM.
UM, IN REGARDS TO THE SETBACK, UM, THERE ARE TWO HISTORIC HOUSES THAT FRONT DAWSON STREET ON THIS BLOCK.
THEY ARE ON THE IMMEDIATE RIGHT AND LEFT OF THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION.
UM, THE TWO STORY HOUSE HERE, THE APPLICANT IS NOTED THAT THEY HAVE A GREATER SETBACK THEN IS ACTUALLY NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT WAS BUILT APPROXIMATELY 20 YEARS AGO OR SO.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS UPDATED AND NOTED THAT THERE WON'T BE A, A DRIVEWAY THAT TERMINATES INTO THE FRONT FACADE, UM, THAT IS APPROPRIATE.
STAFF FINDS THAT TO BE APPROPRIATE.
UM, THE COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO THE MASSING, WHILE THE MASSING HAS BEEN RESOLVED, THIS ORIGINALLY WAS A TWO STORY HOUSE OR APPEARED TO HAVE THE HEIGHT OF A TWO STORY HOUSE.
UM, STAFF STILL FINDS THAT WITH THE LACK OF PORCH MASSING AND TRADITIONAL PORCH ELEMENTS, UM, THAT THAT MASSING ISN'T SPECIFICALLY BROUGHT TO A SCALE THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S FOUND WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
UM, SO WHILE WE'RE PROVIDING COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO THE MASSING AND THE MASSING HAS BEEN REDUCED, IT'S STILL NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE TRADITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
UM, SO MAYBE THAT'LL PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY TO THOSE COMMENTS.
SO, UH, JUST SO THE APPLICANT KNOWS, THE TWO BIGGEST ITEMS, UH, THAT WE WOULD BE DISCUSSING IN D R C WOULD BE THE MASSING, THE ROOF FORM AND THE PORT ELEMENTS.
I THINK THOSE ARE ALSO PRETTY IMPORTANT FOR THIS, UH, FINAL DESIGN, THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO UNDERSTAND KINDA WHAT THE SOLUTION IS FOR PARKING, IF YOU'RE COMING OFF OF, UH, THE ALLEY AND HOW, HOW YOU'RE ACCOMMODATING THAT IF IT'S NOT GONNA BE IN THE FRONT.
UM, THE PARKING IS GOING TO BE IN THE FRONT OF THE ALLEY PLUS, UM, IN THE FRONT OF THE STREET AND THE TIME THAT, UM, WE ARE JUST, UM, PARKING AND UM, LIKE SHORT TERM AND PROBABLY FOR THE LONG TERM WE ARE, UH, PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE, UH, LIKE A BACK DOOR IN THE BACK OF THE, UM, UM, IN FRONT OF THE, UM, HOUSE IN THE ALLEY.
AND, UM, THAT'S GONNA GIVE ACCESS TO THE BACKYARD.
AND IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN CANY, IT'S JUST GONNA BE PARKED THERE.
I, I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY MORE TO BE DISCUSSED HERE IN MORE DETAIL, UH, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING.
UM, SO I WOULD MOVE THAT THIS CASE BE REFERRED TO HIS
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? I NOTICED THE SAME THING, BUT I ALSO NOTICED THAT THE TWO ADJUSTMENT PROPERTIES DO HAVE ELLIE PARKING.
[02:45:01]
FOR COMMENT.I JUST DIDN'T SEE IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT THERE WAS ANY
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO SEND THIS TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE FISH.
UM, SO EDWARD IS GOING TO START CALLING THE APPLICANT FOR NUMBER 24.
UM, JUST A QUICK NOTE, UH, FOR THE AGENDA.
LEE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT, SO WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY.
AND THEN ITEM 25 3 35 TRAIL, AS YOU KNOW, HAS BEEN RESET TO JUNE 19TH, UM, AND A SPECIAL HEARING AT 8:15 AM UM, WE'LL GIVE EDWARD JUST A FEW MORE SECONDS TO GET THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM 24 ON THE LINE.
UH, HAVE THE APPLICANT DAVID, ON THE LINE.
[20-3774 Address/Description: 914 N PINE ST, 918 N Pine HDRC Case No.: 2020-236 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: PINE 14 LLC Request: Amendments to a previously approved design for a 1-story residential structure and a 1-story rear accessory structure City Council Dist.: 2 ]
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 24 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 36, 9 14 AND NINE 18 NORTH POND.THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, AMEND THE SETBACK OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED NEW CONSTRUCTION ON THE LOT AT NINE 18 NORTH POND.
AND TWO, TO AMEND THE DESIGN, INCLUDING MATERIALS MASSING IN ROOF FORM OF THE PROPOSED REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT NINE 14 NORTH POND.
THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO PROPOSED TO REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT OF THIS STRUCTURE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE AMENDMENT TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SETBACK AS SUBMITTED BASED ON FINDING C.
THE FOUNDATION INSPECTION IS TO BE SCHEDULED WITH O H P STAFF TO ENSURE THAT FOUNDATION SETBACKS AND HEIGHTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED DESIGN.
THE INSPECTION IS TO OCCUR AFTER THE INSTALLATION OF FORM WORK AND PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF FOUNDATION MATERIAL.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE AMENDMENTS TO THE PROPOSED REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDINGS D THROUGH G.
WHILE THE PROPOSED MASSING IS APPROPRIATE, THE PROPOSED CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS AND ROOF FORM ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINE.
UM, I HAVE THE APPLICANT DAVID ERICKSON HERE ON THE LINE.
AM I SUPPOSED TO DO THAT NOW? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU DAVID.
YEAH, DAVID, IF YOU WANT TO YOU, DAVID, ARE YOU THERE? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, WE CAN.
HELLO? OKAY, SORRY, I GUESS MY HEADPHONES ARE OKAY, SORRY.
UM, A LITTLE BACKGROUND, UM, ORIGINALLY WENT WITH A SYMPATHETIC FORM ON THIS REAR STRUCTURE IN ONE OF MY PREVIOUS ITERATIONS.
BUT WHEN APPROACHING THE H G R C, IT ASKED ME TO CONSIDER WOOD SIDING AND HARDY BOARD FOR CLADDING.
AND I HAD ALREADY WENT THROUGH MANY ITERATIONS TRYING TO STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN THE O H P GUIDELINES THAT FIT THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD FABRIC WHILE FINDING A SOLUTION THAT ALSO RESPONDED WELL TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE ON MY PROPERTY.
THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A ONE-OFF AND REQUIRED A BIT MORE OF A NUANCED APPROACH.
AND SO ONCE GETTING BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AFTER PREVIOUS HEARING, UM, I COULDN'T GET THE COHESIVE PROJECT I LIKED WITH THE HARDY BOARD PAINTED BUILDING, HENCE WHY I TRIED TO DO A MASONRY STRUCTURE IN THE REAR THAT RESPONDED BETTER TO THE MASONRY STRUCTURE I ALREADY HAVE ON SITE.
BUT REVIEWING THE COMMENTS, I DIDN'T HAVE MUCH TIME TO GET, UM, AN UPDATED DRAWING BACK TO EDWARD.
UM, BUT I'M FINE GOING BACK TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, UH, FORM OF THAT RESTRUCTURE.
UM, BUT I'M ASKING FOR SOME FLEXIBILITY ON THE MATERIALS, GIVEN THE CONDITIONS I'M TRYING TO BALANCE.
UM, SO LIKE THE PROPOSED DOING LIKE A, A VERTICAL T AND G WOOD SIDING ON THE FRONT SLASH STREET ELEVATION THAT, UM, THAT THAT WAY I COULD RESPOND TO THE NEIGHBOR,
[02:50:01]
THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES.BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE NON STREET FACING FACADES, THE NORTH AND SOUTH, UM, FOR BOTH THE FRONT STRUCTURE AND THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BE CLAD IN A CORRUGATED METAL SIDING.
AND I'M REQUESTING PERMISSION FOR A CORRUGATED METAL ROOF VERSUS STAINING STAIN.
UM, I THINK THESE MATERIALS RESPOND BETTER TO THE IMMEDIATE INDUSTRIAL CONTEXT OF MY, MY BRICK MASONRY STRUCTURE ON SITE.
AND, AND SINCE THAT WAS SOMETHING I ALREADY RESTORED, I'D LIKE TO KEEP A MATERIAL PALLET THAT RENDERS THESE NEW STRUCTURES SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL FOLK VICTORIAN, EARLY TEXAN PIONEER TYPOLOGY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHILE ALSO BEING, UM, WHILE KEEPING A PALLET THAT MATCHES THE INDUSTRIAL NATURE OF MY BUILDING AND THE OTHER INDUSTRIAL GABLE WAREHOUSES THAT ARE CLAD AND CORRUGATED AROUND, UH, DIGNITY HILL.
UM, SO I THINK, I MEAN THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO PROPOSE WOOD ON THE FRONT, METAL ON THE SIDE.
I'LL GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL SHAPE.
IF I COULD FOLLOW UP WITH A QUESTION.
UM, I, I KNOW YOU HAVE A, A, A CONCRETE FRAME AND I THINK IT'S A STRUCTURAL CLAY TILE FILLED BUILDING, UH, BACK THERE WHERE YOU'RE, UH, PROPOSING THIS CHANGE.
UM, I'M, I WONDER IF STAFF COULD PULL UP AN IMAGE OF THAT, UH, CONTEXT AND WHILE THEY'RE, DO WE HAVE A A COLOR PHOTO OF THAT BECAUSE THIS IS, THIS IS A, A UNIQUE SITUATION IN THAT THERE'S A COMMERCIAL KIND OF INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN THE REAR PART OF THIS L-SHAPED LOT AND THAT THE REAR STRUCTURE, UH, THAT YOU'RE DESIGNING IS MEANT TO RESPOND TO THAT IN SOME WAY.
WILL YOU, WILL YOU EXPLAIN TO US THE, THE CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS THAT YOU PROPOSED AND HOW THEY RELATE? YEAH, COMMERCIAL BUILDING BACK THERE? YEAH, I MEAN, THE ITERATION THAT'S UP ON THE SCREEN AS I WAS PROPOSING, DOING A DE HEINOUS CLAY BLOCK STRUCTURE, UM, AND THEN USING A SHED ROOF, WHICH KIND OF LOOKED LIKE A PARTIAL GABLE
UM, SO THAT WAY WHEN LOOKING FROM THE FRONT STRUCTURE YOU COULD SEE A ROOF SLOPE, BUT THEN FROM THE REAR THERE WAS A VERTICAL FACE THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE IN SCALE WITH THE NEIGHBORING MASONRY BUILDING.
UM, SO I, I THINK I HAD A, I HAVE AN ACME BRICK, CLAY BRICK WAREHOUSE, UM, WITH A CINDER BLOCK, UM, GARDEN WALL IN FRONT OF, AND SO I WAS PROPOSING DOING A CLAY BLOCK, ANOTHER CLAY BLOCK WAREHOUSE THAT KIND OF WOULD MAKE A COURTYARD IN THE REAR.
WELL, I THINK THE, THE DENA'S UH, STRUCTURAL TILE IN MY OPINION IS PROBABLY APPROPRIATE.
AND WHAT YOU'RE SUBMITTING HERE, UH, WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING HERE AS AN AMENDMENT, UH, I THINK IN MY OPINION, IS MORE APPROPRIATE THAN THE CORRUGATED METAL SOLUTION.
I THINK, UH, MATT PICKING UP THE MATERIAL AND THE STRUCTURE THAT'S ON THE SITE, UH, COULD BE SOMETHING THAT, UH, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION.
AND, UH, I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS ABOUT THAT.
COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER GO, VELAS VELASQUEZ, I, I, UM, UH, AND I THINK LIKE SOME OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE'VE SEEN, I I I, YOU KNOW, IN CAUTION, UH, WOULD, WOULD RECOMMEND, YOU KNOW, AS, AS BEST AS POSSIBLE, WE GET OUT OF THE WAY OF THIS DESIGNER.
UM, I, I FIND, UH, HIS SOLUTION VERY, VERY, UH, MUCH RELATED AND IN CONTEXT OF THAT, OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I, I'VE GOTTA, I'VE GOTTA JUST SAY THAT, THAT SEEING IT WITH THE CORRUGATED MATERIALS, UM, IT, IT IS MORE, UM, UH, APPROPRIATE.
IT IS ALMOST AS IF THAT CHALLENGE CAUSED THE DESIGNER TO DIG IN A LITTLE DEEPER BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET INTO THE, YOU KNOW, THE AREA, THE RAILROAD STATION AND ALL OF THAT, YOU SEE THESE MATERIALS, ESPECIALLY THERE'S, THERE'S SOME REALLY HIDDEN ARC DECO BUILDINGS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, THAT, THAT USE THAT CORRUGATED TIN.
SO IT, IT, IT, IT IS, UM, A A A WONDERFUL EXAMPLE OF, OF GOOD ARCHITECTURE THAT THAT KIND OF PRESENTS THIS SHADOW, THIS GHOST OF, OF A PAST THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT IS HARD TO LOOK AT THE TRAIN STATIONS OUT THERE AND, AND SEE THEM AS BEAUTIFUL, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THEM, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF A KID OF PARTS, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS THAT YOU REALLY HAVE A, A, A, A KNACK FOR USING ALL THE TOOLS IN YOUR TOOLBOX.
SO I I, I WOULD THINK THAT IF WE PUSH TOO HARD, UH, WE MAY END UP WITH SOMETHING THAT ISN'T THIS THIS FINE STATEMENT THAT, UH, ABOVE ALL I THINK SHOULD BE COMMENDED IS MY COMMENTS.
[02:55:03]
THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP.I, UM, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER FISH.
I LIKE, UH, VERY MUCH ACTUALLY THIS IMPROVEMENT.
JUST I WANNA UNDERSTAND AGAIN, THE COURT, YOU'RE DOING THE METAL ROOF IN THE HOUSE ON THE FRONT OF THE STREET, RIGHT? SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE IDEA OF WHY WE WANTED, YEAH.
SO THAT, IS THAT CORRUGATED OR METAL? YEAH.
UM, WHAT I'M PROPOSING IS DOING A CORRUGATED METAL ROOF ON THE FRONT BUILDING AS KIND OF A NOD TO THE REAR, BUT YET HAVING A WOOD FACADE ON THE FRONT BUILDING AS A NOD TO THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES.
AND THEN AS YOU GO DOWN THE ALLEY, YOU'D SEE THAT THAT WOOD BUILDING ON THE FRONT ACTUALLY REVEALS ITSELF AS A CORRUGATED METAL, UM, GABLE STRUCTURE THAT YOU CAN'T QUITE FIGURE OUT IS IT PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR IS IT PART OF THIS REAR INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX? AND I WAS TRYING TO STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN THOSE TWO.
SO YEAH, ON THE YOU GO ONE, YEAH, SO THAT'S THE FRONT ELEVATION WITH THE WOOD LOUVER FACADE.
SO THAT WAY IT KIND OF, IT'S LIKE A WOLF AND SHEEP'S CLOTHING SAYING I'M LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
BUT THEN AS YOU GO DOWN THE ALLEY, UM, ON THE NEXT PAGE, YOU WOULD SEE THAT IT'S A CORRUGATED METAL STRUCTURE.
AND I THINK THE ROOF ALSO HELPS LEND ITSELF TO THAT.
NOW I JUST FEEL LIKE WHEN WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION INITIALLY, WE WERE ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF THE METAL ROOF AND THE OPENINGS AND THE FRONT BECAUSE WE WERE KIND OF GOING WITH WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AS A HOUSE AND, AND THEN THE BACK WE WERE LETTING IT BE MORE THE INDUSTRIAL COMPARED TO THAT WAREHOUSE THAT'S IN THE BACK.
UM, YEAH, THIS IS, UH, CHAIRMAN FETZER AND UM, THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER ALSO THAT, UH, THE FRONT STRUCTURE, UH, PERSONALLY I THINK NEEDS TO SPEAK MORE TO THE, UH, RESIDENTIAL, UH, WOOD FRAME HOUSES ON THE STREET.
UM, I CAN SUPPORT THE, WHAT YOU'VE PROPOSED FOR THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, WITH THAT, HAVING THE STRUCTURAL CLAY TILE AND A, UH, CORRUGATED METAL ROOF FOR THAT ONE.
BUT I, I STILL, UH, FEEL THAT THE FRONT STRUCTURE, UH, AT NINE 18, UM, NEEDS TO BE, UH, WHAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, WHICH IS A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF WITH, UH, THE WOOD SIDING.
CAN CLA CAN STAFF CLARIFY FOR US WHAT'S, WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA FOR THE, IN THIS APPLICATION BECAUSE I, I I WASN'T CLEAR ABOUT ABOUT THERE BEING MODIFICATIONS AT THE FRONT.
UH, SO, UH, IN THE REQUEST LANGUAGE STAFF HAS NOTED THE ADJUSTMENT OR AMENDMENT TO THE SETBACK OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE THAT'S PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AT NINE 18 NORTH PINE AND THEN AN AMENDMENT TO THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
UH, THIS WAS BEHIND THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE AT NINE 14 NORTH PINE, UM, THE MODIFICATION TO THE, UM, TO THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE AT NINE 18 NORTH PINE.
THAT'S MISSED IN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
THERE'S A MATERIAL CHANGE ON THE FRONT STRUCTURE THAT WE MISSED IN THE REQUEST.
WE REALLY THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT THE DETACHED ACCESSORY.
CAN I GRANDFATHERED IN THEN AND JUST LET ME SLIP BY
UM, SO WE WOULD JUST NOT, WE CAN, WE CAN ALWAYS WITHDRAW ITEM NUMBER ONE.
SO THE PROJECT STANDS AS IT HAS BEEN APPROVED PREVIOUSLY.
WE'LL APPROVE ITEM NUMBER TWO AS PRESENTED, AND THEN THE APPLICANT CAN COME BACK IF HE WANTS.
UH, ANYTHING ELSE?
UM, STAFF CAN TAKE UP THAT ITEM OR NOT.
YEAH, SO THE, THE ADJUSTMENT TO THE SETBACK WAS PREVIOUSLY OR WAS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT.
UM, WHILE THE APPLICANT HAS LESS THAN THE PROPOSED SETBACK FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AT NINE 18 NORTH PINE, THAT SETBACK IS STILL GREATER THAN THE SETBACKS OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH.
UH, SO STAFF FINDS THE AMENDED SETBACK TO BE APPROPRIATE.
UM, OH, SO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THAT, THAT REQUEST AT THE TIME.
IS THAT SOMETHING THE APPLICANT'S STILL INTERESTED IN, IN REMAINING THAT I ITEM NUMBER ONE? YES.
[03:00:01]
UM, YEAH, I'D LIKE TO KEEP THE BUILDING WHERE IT IS.KEEP THE BUILDING WHERE IT IS OR YOU WANNA AMEND THE SETBACK? OH NO, NO, SORRY, I WANNA AMEND THE SETBACK.
YEAH, THE APP, MY APPLICATION IS ASKING TO PUSH THAT FRONT BUILDING FORWARD, CHANGE THE SIDE ELEVATION, MATERIAL PALLET, AND THEN GET THE REAR ACCESSORY BUILDING, UM, IN CLAY BLOCK WITH THE SHED ROOF AS I DREW.
SO WHAT I THINK RIGHT NOW STAFF IS SAYING IS THE CHANGE OF MATERIAL IN THAT FRONT PROPERTY WAS NOT REALLY CLEAR IN THE APPLICATION, OR WAS IT, CAN STAFF CLARIFY? STAFF SIMPLY MISSED IT IN THE APPLICATION? IS IS THE AN, IS THE ANIMATED OR THE RENDERING ACCURATE? NOT THE PLAN RENDERING? YEAH, IF YOU GO TO PAGE 16 TWO UP, I THINK, WELL THE ONE THAT'S ON SCREEN RIGHT NOW, THE CITY SCREEN.
OH, I'M SORRY, THERE'S A LAG ON THE SCREEN.
I WANNA ASK THE APPLICANT, IT SEEMS LIKE THE COMMISSION WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE, UH, CHANGES IN THE, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE BACK AND, AND, AND KEEPING THE STRUCTURE AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL BE OKAY WITH? WE DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE FRONT, BUT THE, THE, THE, THE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW ON THE SCREEN, I WAS ASKING IS THAT ACCURATE TO WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED? IT IS.
THE ISSUE IS THAT IN THE POSTING OF THIS ITEM, WE DID NOT NOTE A MATERIAL CHANGE.
AND SO EVEN THOUGH WE SEE IT HERE, WE CAN'T TAKE ACTION ON THE CHANGE IN MATERIALS.
WHAT WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON IS THE CHANGE IN SETBACK FOR THIS BUILDING AND THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE ACCESSORIES.
BUT NOW CORY, IF THE CITY IS THE ONE THAT MISSED THAT UP, I MEAN THE APPLICANT PUT THAT IN AND WHY IS THE APPLICANT PENALIZED? BECAUSE THE CITY MISSED IT.
IT'S A, IT'S A LEGAL NOTIFICATION AND SO IT'S DO APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE AND IT'LL HAVE TO BE TAKEN UP AT A LATER POSTED AGENDA.
WELL, IT ALSO SOUNDS LIKE THE COMMISSIONERS, UH, ARE ALSO MORE THAT GOING THAT WAY.
SO IS THE APPLICANT OKAY WITH THIS? IS THAT SOMETHING COMMISSIONERS? I, I WANNA NOTE A, I WANNA NOTE A FEW THINGS ABOUT THIS THOUGH.
I ORIGINALLY MADE THE DEADLINE FOR THE PREVIOUS H D R C MEETING, SO I'VE BEEN WAITING A MONTH FOR THIS MEETING AND I, AND SO I, I DO WANT TO JUST NOTE THAT I, LIKE, I'VE ALREADY WAITED FOUR WEEKS AND I'VE PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO WHY THAT BUILDING'S, THAT FRONT BUILDING ON NINE 18 MATERIALITY SHOULD GO TO CORRUGATED METAL ON THE SIDES.
UM, BECAUSE I WANTED OF MYSELF WANTING A COHESIVE PROJECT FROM THAT FRONT BUILDING TO THE BACK BUILDING WHERE YOU JUST CARRY A FEW MATERIAL LANGUAGES FROM THE FRONT TO THE BACK.
AND SO, BECAUSE I'VE RECESSED THE BUILDING BEHIND THE TWO SHORT STRUCTURES AND LEFT THE WOOD FACADE ON THE FRONT, I'M ASKING FOR SOME LENIENT ON THE SIDE MATERIALS FOR THAT NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATION IN THAT FRONT BUILDING THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT NOW TO LET IT GO TO SOMETHING SLIGHTLY MORE INDUSTRIAL.
BECAUSE I'M TRYING NOT TO DO ANOTHER PAINTED WOODHOUSE.
I'M TRYING TO DO SOMETHING SYMPATHETIC AND KIND, BUT SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND SOMETHING MODERN AND SOMETHING THAT WOULD TAKE THIS JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER INTO A NARRATIVE FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S NOT JUST PARTY BOARD BUILDINGS.
AND I, I REALLY, I'VE SEEN MANY, MANY GOOD EXAMPLES OF THIS IN AUSTRALIA.
I'VE SEEN MANY GOOD EXAMPLES IN MEXICO CITY.
I'VE SEEN MANY GOOD EXAMPLES IN, IN BELGIUM.
I WOULD LIKE A SHOT AT DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS HERE.
UM, WELL THIS IS, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
I BELIEVE THE ISSUE IS THAT, UH, THE POSTED PUBLIC NOTICE DID NOT LIST THE CHANGE OF MATERIALS ON THE FRONT STRUCTURE.
AND SO LEGALLY WE CANNOT TAKE ACTION ON THAT CHANGE.
OKAY, THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ.
I, I I I WOULD SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT CAN BE PENALIZED FOR AN OMISSION ON THE CITY'S PART.
THE THE, UH, THE THING THOUGH IS THAT MY FEAR IS THAT AS A, AS A PIECE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, AND THAT HE'S MEETING SO MANY DIFFERENT CRITERIA, I'VE GOTTA TELL YOU VERY HONESTLY, UM, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE'RE ENTERING INTO KIND OF THE REALM OF DESIGNING THIS PROJECT FOR THE CLIENT THAT, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, THE REALITY FOR ME IS THAT WHETHER IT'S ONE MATERIAL OR THE OTHER, IT'S WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE, OF, OF, OF THE SAME SUBSET OF, OF, OF, UH, SOLUTIONS.
SO WE COULD SAY THAT WE WANT IT READ AND IN REALITY
[03:05:01]
HE MIGHT HAVE TO MAKE IT RED.BUT, BUT, BUT IF, IF THERE'S OTHER OPTIONS WITHIN, WITHIN THE UNIVERSE OF, OF POSSIBILITIES, THEN AT SOME POINT WE'RE, IT'S JUST NOT FAIR.
UH, HE, HE'S PRESENTING, OR WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO US IS, IS A VERY UNIQUE PIECE OF ARCHITECTURE THAT IS, UH, UM, UH, VERY OBVIOUSLY, UH, UNIQUE TO HIS, NOT ONLY TO TO TO THE KIND OF PARTS THAT HE USED FROM, FROM, FROM THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT, BUT, BUT IT'S UNIQUE TO WHAT HE IMAGINES IT TO BE.
AND TO THE LARGEST EXTENT WE'VE ALREADY EMPOWERED HIS IMAGINATION, BUT NOW WE'RE LIMITING HIS IMAGINATION BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S A COUPLE OF, OF, OF BETTER IDEAS THAT, THAT OTHER, OTHER IMAGINATIONS MIGHT SEE IN THEIR HEADS.
THE REALITY IS THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF ARCHITECTURE, AND IF WE'RE NOT COMPLETELY SAYING THAT IT'S WRONG, THAT IT HAS NO CONTEXT AND NO PLACE IN THIS PLACE, THEN WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO, UH, UH, UM, UM, UH, NOT TRY TO DESIGN THIS GUY'S PROJECT.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE, ACTUALLY, UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, CAN I, I'M SORRY.
UM, I'VE GOT A COUPLE THINGS I NEED TO GET OUT.
UM, THE FIRST IS A QUESTION TOWARDS CITY ATTORNEY.
UM, I'M GONNA ASK THE QUESTION AND THEN WHILE SHE'S THINKING ABOUT IT, I'M GOING TO READ THE COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SO ALMA, THE POSTED LANGUAGE ON THE AGENDA IS AMENDMENTS TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN FOR A ONE STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, WHICH IS WHAT WE SEE ON THE SCREEN, THAT BUILDING AND A ONE STORY REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
UM, SO AMENDMENTS TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN IS PRETTY BROAD.
WE DID NOT CAPTURE IN THE STAFF REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION THE CHANGE OF MATERIAL THAT IS NOTED IN THE EXHIBITS.
SO THE QUESTION IS, CAN THE COMMISSION TAKE ACTION ON THAT PROPOSED CHANGE OF MATERIALS BASED ON THE POSTED AGENDA LANGUAGE? WHILE YOU'RE MULLING THAT OVER, I'M GONNA READ THE COMMENTS.
UM, THIS COMES FROM SCOTT ALBERT ON BEHALF OF SEVERAL NEIGHBORS IN THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, WE SUPPORT O H P AND SUGGEST THAT THE GUIDE FOR FORMS AND MATERIALS BE THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE BLOCK RATHER THAN THE COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, WHICH IS THE OUTLIER, WHICH IS NOW SERVING AS A RESIDENTIAL USE.
ALMA, DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON HOW WE CAN PROCEED? MIGHT BE MUTED.
I THINK YOU CAN PROCEED ON, ON ACTION ON THE ITEM, ON THE CHANGE OF MATERIALS.
IS IT PART OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN? YES.
THE MATERIALS WERE PART OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN.
THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THAT DESIGN.
JUST NOTE COMMISSIONERS THAT, THAT YOU CAN TAKE ACTION, BUT IT DOES NOT COME WITH A STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
SO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I BELIEVE YOU WERE GONNA MAKE A MOTION.
I WAS GOING TO TRY TO MAKE A MOTION HERE TO, UH, ONE, UH, APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED SETBACK, UH, WITH STAFF'S APPROVAL AND RECOMMENDATION.
AND, UH, ITEM TWO, APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE OF MATERIALS, UH, GOING TO A STRUCTURAL PLATE TILE AND A CORRUGATED ROOF FOR THE REAR STRUCTURE.
AND THREE, APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE OF MATERIALS TO THE FRONT STRUCTURE AT NINE 18 AS PER, PER, UH, AS SUBMITTED IN THE MATERIALS THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED TO O H B.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND VELASQUEZ OUR SECOND.
WE HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE FISH.
I'M SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION THERE.
UM, THAT CONCLUDES, UM, THE ITEMS ON OUR INDIVIDUAL AGENDA.
[Approval of HDRC Meeting Minutes for June 3, 2020.]
HAVE MINUTES AVAILABLE FROM JUNE 3RD?[03:10:04]
DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF, UH, JUNE 3RD MINUTES? CHAIRMAN, I, UH, MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 3RD, 2002, 2020.CAN I JUST, CAN WE, DID WE RECEIVE THOSE? UM, IT IS POSTED.
KRISTEN, CAN YOU CHIME IN AND LET US KNOW WHEN WE SENT OUT THE MINUTES? HELLO EVERYONE.
YES, I SENT OUT THE MINUTES ON FRIDAY.
JUST CONFIRM AND GO AHEAD WITH A MOTION.
DID WE HAVE A SECOND IF WE DIDN'T? THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE TO ADJOURN.
COMMISSIONER GIBBS? I'LL SECOND I.