[00:00:08]
I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5TH, 2020.
[Roll Call]
I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE.[Announcements]
WE DO HAVE A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT FOR TRANSLATION SERVICES.[Chairman’s Statement]
THE CHAIRMAN STATEMENT, PLEASE.THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN AND THE VICE CHAIR IS SCOTT CARPENTER.
IT IS A FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER IN ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY, 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 GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL AND APPEAL OF A DECISION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH THIS MEETING THROUGH LIVESTREAM.
THEY CAN ALSO LISTEN TO THE MEETING THROUGH AUDIO ONLY BY CALLING 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3 IN ENGLISH OR IN SPANISH.
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 TWO MINUTES FOR ALL THEIR COMMENTS.
APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF ANY TYPE OF PERMIT.
PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ALL WORK.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR WORK APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS.
NO WORK OF ANY TYPE IS TO BE STARTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS AFTER A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
AT THIS TIME I'LL ASK O H P STAFF TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING.
UM, WE'LL START, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND PUT ON THE CASE LIST SO YOU CAN VIEW THOSE.
UM, SO AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE 15 ITEMS ON TODAY'S CONSENT AGENDA, UM, AND AN ADDITIONAL, UH, 16 TO 23 ITEMS ON THE INDIVIDUAL AGENDA.
ITEM NUMBER 8 3 23 SOUTH ALAMO.
THAT'S A REQUEST FOR MAVERICK PLAZA HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO AUGUST 19TH.
UM, AS WELL AS ITEM NUMBER 21 5 21 5 29 NORTH PALMETTO WILL ALSO NOT BE HEARD TODAY.
UM, ANY COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR THOSE ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEWING YOUR FOLDERS.
THEY WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT HEARING DATE.
UM, ANYBODY WHO SUBMITTED COMMENTS, THOSE COMMENTS WILL BE INCLUDED AT THE NEXT AGENDA YOU WOULD LIKE TO UPDATE OR REPLACE.
ANY OF YOUR COMMENTS WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT AS WELL.
[Public Comments]
SO LET'S START.UM, WE'LL START BY READING, UM, PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, FOLLOWING THOSE COMMENTS, UM, COMMISSIONERS WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO PULL ANY ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION.
UM, SO FIRST IS ITEM 2 1 20 WEST CRAIG PLACE.
UM, THIS COMES FROM PAULA BONDERANT, 2 0 8 WEST CRAIG.
I LIKE THESE PLANS VERY MUCH, BUT I'M PUZZLED AS TO THE LOCATIONS OF THE PARKING PAD AND THE CIRCULAR DRIVE.
MENTIONED THE SECTION ABOUT THE SWIMMING POOL.
UM, WE HAVE COMMENTS ON ITEM 13, 2 10 CALLAHAN SUBMITTED BY MARCY NEWMAN, TWO AT 3 0 2 CALLAHAN AVENUE.
UM, WE SUPPORT THIS CHANGE TO INCLUDE A DRIVEWAY AND CARPORT.
UM, THIS IS SUBMITTED, UM, BY A GROUP OF NEIGHBORS, UM, ON BEHALF OF, UH, MONICA SABINO 1120 EAST CROCKETT.
WE OPPOSED THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR THIS PROJECT AS THE HEIGHT AND MASSING FOR THE TWO SIDE BY SIDE.
IDENTICAL HOUSES DO NOT CONFORM TO THE CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERN FOR OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT ON
UM, YES, THERE ARE TWO STORY HOUSES NEARBY, BUT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE HISTORIC, UM, COMMERCIAL USE AT LAMAR MESQUITE.
[00:05:01]
SERVE SINGLE FAMILY USES UNTIL 20 19, 4 21 HAYES AND 4 22 FEIN WAY WHERE ONE LOT THEY'RE DESIGNATED AS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.PLAN 2009, FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
UM, AND THE LOT WAS PLATTED BY THE CURRENT APPLICANT TO CREATE TWO RMM FOUR LOTS.
HAYES CURRENTLY HAS ONE LARGE HOUSE WITH FOUR APARTMENT UNITS.
HER B HAD THE PROPOSED PROJECT PARCEL AS SHOWN AS 4 21 HAYES APARTMENT TWO AT 54 89 SQUARE FEET.
IF THIS PROPOSAL AS PRESENTED AS APPROVED, THERE WILL BE EIGHT DWELLING UNITS ON 95 35 SQUARE FEET PER OWNER SURVEY AT 4 21 HAYES TO EQUAL 36 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.
UM, NOT ONLY IS THE DENSITY OUT OF CHARACTER FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BUT THE BUILDING INTENSITY FOR EIGHT TOTAL APARTMENTS AT 4 21 HAYES SLASH IS NONCONFORMING TO THE DEVELOPMENT FOR OUR DISTRICT FOR REFERENCE TOMORROW DEFINES MF 33 AS HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
UM, EVEN WITH ONLY SIX DWELLING UNITS, 27 UNITS PER AC ACRE IS NOT LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
AS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ENDORSES FOR THIS BLOCK, HOW MANY WAYS CAN IT BE SHOWN? THERE'S TOO MUCH HEIGHT MASSING AND BUILDING INTENSITY HERE.
UM, ALSO FOR ITEM 14, UM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, ONE OF 70 KING WILLIAM.
UM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OPPOSES THE PROJECT AT 4 22 FE WAY IN THE DIG NUITY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF TWO LARGE STRUCTURES ON THIS PARCEL IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH HISTORIC BUILDING DENSITY PATTERNS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AMASSING INTENSITY AND DESIGN OF THE BUILDINGS IS COMPLETELY OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE PATTERN WITH THE HISTORIC PATTERNS IN THE DISTRICT.
UM, AND THAT IS ALL OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WE HAVE.
[Consent Agenda]
UM, FOR ITEMS ON CONSENT, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL ITEMS AS CHAIRMAN FETZER, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM NUMBER 7 2 2 6 5 AUSTIN HIGHWAY.OKAY, WE'LL CONTACT THAT APPLICANT AND WE'LL MARK IT HERE ON THE SCREEN.
COMMISSIONER GIBBS, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM 14 4 2 2 FAME LAY ANY OTHERS? OKAY.
UM, PLEASE NOTE THAT UH, COMMISSIONER FETZER WILL, UH, RECUSE UH, FROM THE VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
HE HAS AN ITEM, ITEM A WHERE HE NEEDS TO RECUSE SO HE WILL NOT VOTE ON THE CONSENT ITEMS. UM, VICE CHAIR CARPENTER WILL PROCEED OVER THE MOTION.
UM, WE CAN NOW ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ITEMS ONE THROUGH FIVE, EXCUSE ME, ONE THROUGH SIX, NINE THROUGH 13 AND 15.
I MOVE FOR APPROVAL ON ITEMS ONE THROUGH SIX, NINE THROUGH 13 AND 15 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
SECOND, MR. BOWMAN, WAS THAT A SECOND? WELL, I THINK SOMEBODY BEAT ME TO IT.
SO OBJECT AND A SECOND, UH, FOR APPROVALS OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH SIX, EIGHT THROUGH 13 AND ITEM 15.
UM, YOU NEED A ROLL CALL ON THAT ONE? YEAH, ONE THROUGH SIX AND THEN NOT EIGHT BECAUSE THAT'S POSTPONED.
SORRY, ONE THROUGH SIX, NINE THROUGH 13 AND 15.
AND I ALSO NEED CLARIFICATION ON WHO WAS THE SECOND? YOU CAN, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND PUT ME AS THE SECOND ON THAT.
SO CAN WE CALL ON THAT PLEASE? YES.
AYE UH, FETZER IS RECUSED IN LAO.
UM, SO IF COMMISSIONER FETZER CAN REJOIN US, I, WE
[20-4551 Address/Description: 2265 AUSTIN HWY HDRC Case No.: 2019-278 Public Property: Yes Applicant: Debra Dockery/Debra J. Dockery, Architect, P.C. Request: Construction of a fire station City Council Dist.: 2]
WILL HEAR ITEM SEVEN.UM, LAUREN, CAN YOU UNMUTE STEPH AND SHE WILL, UH, READ THE CASE AND INTRODUCE THE APPLICANT.
STEPH, ARE YOU THERE? HERE STEPHANIE? YES.
ALRIGHT, STEP, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES, I'M ON THE LINE.
UM, IF YOU CAN INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
THIS IS DEBRA RY, DEBRA RY ARCHITECT PC.
WE'RE THE DESIGN ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT AT 2265 AUSTIN HIGHWAY.
A, UH, NEW FIRE STATION NUMBER 24 FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
I BELIEVE WE HAD QUE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
[00:10:01]
YES.UM, THANKS FOR JOINING US, UH, DEBORAH.
ONE, IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR RENDERING ON, UH, PAGE 14.
THIS ONE, UM, HAD A QUESTION ABOUT HOW THE BRICK AND THE METAL SIDING MEET AT THAT, UM, NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE OFFICE AREA.
UH, AND WONDERING WHETHER, UH, THE BRICK AND STONE, UH, SHOULDN'T TURN THE CORNER, UH, AND POSSIBLY EXTEND FOR THE LENGTH OF THAT LOW ROOF SECTION OF THAT, UH, NORTH WALL.
IT SEEMS VERY, UH, TENUOUS WHERE YOU BRING THE, THE, THE MASONRY WORK RIGHT NEXT TO THAT METAL PANEL RIGHT AT THAT OUTSIDE CORNER.
WELL, YES, JUST THAT THE, THE BRICK DOES TURN THE CORNER AND PROJECT SO THAT THE METAL WALL PANEL, UH, WOULD DIE INTO IT.
SO PART OF THE RATIONALE HERE IS THAT, UM, THIS ELEVATION, UH, WHERE IT'S METAL WALL PANEL, YOU SEE THE THREE WINDOWS, THERE'S A LOT GOING ON THERE.
UH, WE'VE GOT THE KEYPAD FOR THE SECURITY GATE, THE GAS SERVICE ENTRY, BUT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IS SO FAR FORWARD OF THAT WALL AND THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER EXTENDS THE WHOLE LENGTH THAT THE WALL IS REALLY NOT VISIBLE EXCEPT WHEN YOU'RE ON THE DRIVEWAY.
SO THAT WAS SORT OF THE RATIONALE FOR, FOR STOPPING THE BRICK AT WHERE IT WAS MOST PROMINENTLY SEEN FROM AUSTIN HIGHWAY.
DOES IT, UM, IT STILL SEEMS RATHER A TENUOUS CONNECTION THERE.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO TURN THE CORNER WITH A, WITH APY LASTER OR SOMETHING WITH THE BRICK? ABSOLUTELY, YES.
PUT A, PUT A PY LASTER RIGHT THERE ON THE NORTH CORNER.
THE, THE EAST EDGE OF THAT NORTH WALL? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
I THINK THAT WOULD HELP THAT, UH, THAT DETAIL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UH, FOR THE APPLICANT? DO YOU ACCEPT ALL THE STIPULATIONS RECOMMENDED BY I'M ON.
BUT, UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WAS DETACHED BY THE, THE CHAIRMAN.
AND, AND, UM, WHILE YOU'VE AGREED TO DOING THE PILE LASTER, UH, IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE THE BRICK RESPOND TO THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, SINGLE STORY MASSING AND I THINK IT WOULD FEEL LESS ARBITRARY IF, IF YOU, IF YOU DID THAT, UM, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO EXPLORE THAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE, UH, TO, UH, WHAT WRAPPING IS PY LASTER? SURE.
WE CAN EXPLORE IT AS AN ALTERNATIVE, ABSOLUTELY.
AND THEN JUST FOLLOW UP WITH STAFF ON, ON, ON, UH, THE OUTCOME OF THAT.
BUT I THINK EITHER ONE OF THOSE ARE, ARE GOOD, UH, SOLUTIONS.
I THINK THE, UH, EXTENDING IT TO WHERE THE, THE TWO STORY JUMPS UP JUST MAKES MORE SENSE FROM A MASSING STANDPOINT.
WE'LL, WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THAT WITH STAFF ON THAT.
SO, UM, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL, UH, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND WITH THE FURTHER STIPULATION THAT THE BRICK THAT WAS DISCUSSED, UH, WE'LL WRAP THE COURT TO FORM EITHER A HIGH LASTER OR EXTEND TO, UM, WHERE THE MASSING JUMPS UP TO A SECOND STORY.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH A SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UM, AND WE'VE BEEN JOINED BY COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ.
UM, SO AGAIN, ITEM EIGHT HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO AUGUST 19TH.
[20-4503 Address/Description: 422 FAYN WAY HDRC Case No.: 2020-255 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Juan Fernandez/CVF LLC Request: Construction of two, 2-story residential structures City Council Dist.: 2]
UM, THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 14.[00:15:01]
CASE, IF WE CAN UNMUTE HIM.UH, ITEM NUMBER 14, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 55 4 22.
FA UH, I CAN READ THE REQUEST INTO THE RECORD IF YOU'D LIKE, OR I HAVE THE APPLICANT, JUAN FERNANDEZ ON THE LINE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I JUST HAD A FEW QUESTIONS.
UM, FIRST QUESTION IS, UM, WHEN YOU'VE, UM, AT THE LAST MEETING, HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND GET THEIR FEEDBACK ON THE PROJECT AND WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS ARE ON THAT? YES.
I ACTUALLY MET WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE ANNUITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND THEY SENT A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT.
I DO SEE THAT HERE IN THE RECORD.
UM, FROM THE DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, AND HAVE YOU, AND, AND YOU KNOW, WITH THE DIGNITY HILL, THERE ARE TWO, TWO GROUPS THERE.
SO I, I KNOW ONE IS IN FAVOR OF YOUR PROPOSAL AND THE OTHER ONE IS NOT.
SO DID YOU JUST SPEAK WITH THE DIGNA WHITTY HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND NOT THE, I JUST SPOKE WITH THE, WITH THE, THE, THE WELL DIGNITY HILL NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION.
UH, AS FAR AS THE COMMENTS OF THE GROUP, THE OTHER GROUP UHHUH, I THINK ALL OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE REGARDING ZONING, NOTHING.
IT'S REGARDING WITHIN CHANGE OF ZONING OF THIS PROPERTY.
SO ALL OF THE COMMENTS ARE RELATED TO ZONING, SO I DON'T THINK IT APPLIES TO, TO THE H D R C.
UH, ON THE OTHER HAND, UM, WE COMPLY WITH THE, WITH THE LAND USE AND I DON'T KNOW, SO THAT THOSE, THOSE ARE THEIR FEELINGS, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT REGARDING H D R C.
AND, UM, THIS IS TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FOR THE, UM, THE D R C MEETING THAT HAPPENED HERE.
UM, CAN I GET A, A LITTLE BRIEF SYNOPSIS ON WHAT HAPPENED THERE? THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
UM, I CAN, I CAN REPORT OUT, I CAN'T QUITE READ THE COMMENTS ON THE SCREEN THERE, BUT I CAN DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO SLIDES 17 THROUGH 29 IN YOUR PACKET.
I THINK MOST OF THE DISCUSSION, UH, WAS ABOUT HOW THE MASS RELATED TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON THE STREET, HOW THE MASS RELATED ALLEY AND THE ADJACENT STRUCTURES, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE PARTICULAR NEED FOR THAT TO BE SHOWN, UH, THAT, THAT THE PROPOSAL BE SHOWN IN THE CONTEXT OF THE BLOCK, WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS ADDED.
I THINK STARTING ON, ON, UH, SLIDE 17.
AND YOU CAN SEE THEM ADDED TO THE CONTEXT THERE.
UM, THERE WERE ALSO SOME CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED THAT SHOWED A LOT OF HARDSCAPE.
THE APPLICANT SAID THAT WAS NOT REALLY MEANT TO BE IN THE PROPOSAL, AND IT APPEARS THAT IT HAS BEEN REMOVED.
SO THE SPACE BETWEEN THE ADDITIONS AND THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS TO REMAIN, UH, MOSTLY LAWN.
UM, THOSE ARE THE MAIN QUESTIONS I HAD.
I, I WANT TO HEAR, HEAR ABOUT THAT FROM OUR COMMISSIONERS AND ALSO ABOUT, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
UM, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS.
CAN I ASK A SECOND? THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL.
[20-4507 Address/Description: 619 DAWSON ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-220 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: anahita moshgbar/Moshgbar Anahita Request: Construction of a 1.5-story, single family residential structure City Council Dist.: 2]
CARRIES.UM, SO THAT BRINGS US TO OUR INDIVIDUAL AGENDA.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 16, THAT'S ALSO EDWARD.
LET'S GIVE HIM JUST A COUPLE MINUTES, MAYBE EVEN JUST 30 SECONDS TO GET THE APPLICANT ON BOARD.
AND EDWARD, LET US KNOW WHEN YOU'RE READY.
AND WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ONE, DON'T WE, COREY? YES.
[00:20:04]
OKAY, EDWARD'S READY.AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 16 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2022.
DAWSON, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 1.5 STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON THE VACANT LINE AT SIX 19 DAWSON STREET, LOCATED WITHIN THE DIGNITY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, I'M HAVING A, UH, I'M, I'M GONNA READ THE, I'M HAVING A P D F ISSUE.
LET ME, EDWARD, YOU CAN READ FROM THE VIDEO CONFERENCE SCREEN IF YOU NEED TO.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND FINAL APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH R STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
ONE, THAT A SETBACK THAT IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY ON THE BLOCK B USED IS NOTED IN FINDING D TWO, THE PROPOSED MASSING FEATURE PROPORTIONS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
AS NOTED IN FINDING F THREE AT THE PROPOSED FOUNDATION HEIGHT OF TWO FEET, BE READ THROUGHOUT EACH ELEVATION AS IT IS ON THE FRONT ELEVATION.
AND FOUR, THE APPLICANT INCORPORATED ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION ON EACH SIDE.
ELEVATION IS NOTED IN FINDING L AND THAT FENESTRATION BE PROPORTIONATE TO THE OVERALL F SIDE.
AS NOTED IN FINDING M I'LL ALSO NOTE THERE'S A CASE COMMENT IN REGARDS TO THE REQUIREMENT OF A FOUNDATION INSPECTION AND THAT OF A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF INSPECTION.
ATA, IF YOU'D LIKE TO START YOUR PRESENTATION, YOU CAN DO SO NOW.
UM,
UM, I LOST THE TIME, THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR ONE SECOND LETTING ME PRESENT THE DESIGN FOR MY FAMILY HOME.
UM, LAST SESSION I PRESENTED THE CHANGES MADE ON THE ADVICE OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE FOLLOWING WHICH THE PANEL GAVE US CONCEPT APPROVAL WITH RESPECT TO ITEMS 3, 4, 5, AND SIX.
UH, TODAY I'M ASKING FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BASED ON THE MODIFICATIONS I HAVE MADE, UH, TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES.
I DON'T KNOW, UH, WHAT THROUGH THE NEW ITEMS OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND PROVIDE CONTEXT FOR THE CHANGES MADE.
UM, NUMBER ONE, THAT THE SETBACK IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THOSE FUNDS HISTORICALLY ON THE BLOCK TO BE USED.
UM, IN OUR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, WE WERE GIVEN A STIPULATION FOR THE SETBACK
NUMBER TWO, UH, THAT THE PROPOSED MASSING FEATURE PROPORTIONS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE FUNDS HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT AS NOTED IN FINDING IT.
UM, BASED ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FROM 15TH, UH, OF JULY MEETING, I HAVE INCORPORATED A DOUBLE GATED ROOF DESIGN OVER THE COURSE TO BRING THE SCALE, UM, DOWN TO HUMAN SCALE.
ADDITIONALLY, I HAVE PROVIDED TWO OPTIONS BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION.
OPTION ONE IS A 22 FOOT, UM, ROOF ROOFER, AND THE OPTION TWO IS A 21 FOOT.
BASED ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THE PERCEPTION OF THE EXTERIOR ELEVATION IS, UH, IN THIS NEGOTIABLE IN THE TWO DESIGNS.
UM, HOWEVER, THE 22 FOOT, UH, ENHANCES THE INTERIOR INTERIOR DESIGN BY ALLOWING FOR NINE FEET, UH, CEILING.
IN CORRELATION WITH THE HISTORIC DESIGN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I WOULD LIKE THE HD C'S APPROVAL TO MAINTAIN A 22 FOOT, UM, CEILING HEIGHT.
HOWEVER, I'M WILLING TO ACCEPT THE 21 FOOT DESIGN IF IT MEANS, UH, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN APP APPRO APPROVAL AND NON-APPROVAL.
NUMBER THREE, THAT THE PROPOSED FOUNDATION HEIGHT OF TWO FEET, YOU READ THROUGH EACH ELEVATIONS AS IT IS ON THE FRONT, FRONT ELEVATION.
UM, THE FRONT, THE FOUNDATION HEIGHT IS IMPACT, CORRECT? UM, HOWEVER I FORGOTTEN IN CERTAIN ADDITIONAL LINE IN THE DRAFTED DOCUMENT, AND I WILL UPDATE APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATELY.
NUMBER FOUR, THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATES ADDITIONAL ATION ON EACH SIDE ELEVATIONS AND NOTED IN FINDING I AND THAT FENESTRATION BE PROPORTIONAL TO OVERALL FACET.
UH, NOTED IN FINDING M UM, WE HAVE TWO STORIES AND TWO CEILING LEVEL THROUGH THE HOUSE.
AND ON THE FIRST STORY, WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT WINDOW HEIGHT, FIVE FOOT AND SEVEN HOOD FOOT.
DEPENDING ON THE CEILING HEIGHT ON THE SIDE OF THE FIRST FLOOR, ALL WINDOWS ARE ALIGNED ON THE EAST ELEVATION.
[00:25:01]
WINDOWS THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR BATHROOM AND CLOSET SPACES AND TWO ADDITIONAL FOR THE SECOND FLOOR.I HAVE PROVIDED THE BOOTH WINDOWS THAT MEET THE STAFF SPECIFICATION.
I HAVE ALSO, I'M ALSO PROPOSING VINYL WINDOWS AS AN AFFORDABLE ITEM.
AS A WOOD WINDOWS ADD AN ADDITIONAL 10,000 TO THE CONSTRUCTION COST.
AS BEFORE, I'M WILLING TO ACCEPT A WOOD DESIGN IF IT IS MEAN.
UH, IF IT MEANS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN APPROVAL AND A NON-APPROVAL.
I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE TIME AND EFFORT.
THIS DISPLAY IS CONTRIBUTED TO, UH, DESIGN OF MY HOME.
AND I REQUEST YOU KINDLY TO APPROVE THE DESIGN FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR CAN I SAY SOMETHING? WE DO HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, WHY DON'T I GO AHEAD AND PROVIDE THOSE AND THEN WE CAN DO DISCUSSION.
UM, SO THE FIRST COMES FROM, UM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY ONE OH 7 MILLION CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DENIAL OR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL.
PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION DESIGN IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH HISTORIC PATTERNS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE FRONT PORCH NEEDS TO HAVE COLUMNS OR PROPER USABLE DEPTH AND PROPOSED GABLE ROOF TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC ONE.
UM, THE SECOND COMES FROM, UM, A GROUP OF NEIGHBORS, UH, SUBMITTED BY MONICA
RECOMMENDATIONS FRONT SETBACK SHOULD ALIGN WITH, WITH EXISTING HISTORIC HOUSES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE LOT.
SIX 11, DAWSON HAS SMALLER SETBACK, WAS BUILT IN 2007.
DOCUMENTATION AND ADDITIONAL ATTENTION IS REQUIRED FOR WINDOWS STAFF FINDINGS.
STATE THAT WINDOWS ARE ALL WOOD.
APPLICANT ATTACHED MANUFACTURER'S DOCUMENTATION FOR ALL WOOD WINDOWS THE APPLICANT'S ELEVATION.
PLEASE COORDINATE THIS DETAIL, UM, TO PREVENT FRONT OF HOUSE PARKING AND NEW CONSTRUCTION AND EXISTING CURB CUTS NEED TO BE REMOVED.
REMOVING THE CURB CUT WILL PROVIDE ONE SPACE OF ON-STREET PARKING FOR THIS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS ALWAYS PRESSURED WITH LACK OF PARKING.
UM, AND LASTLY, SCOTT ALBERT, 9 22 NORTH PINE.
THE APPLICANT'S DRAWINGS SHOW VINYL WINDOWS ARE TO BE USED VINYL, CORRECTLY KNOWN AS P V C A TYPE OF PLASTIC WINDOWS ARE NOT RECOMMENDED AS A MATERIAL.
UM, FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
UM, SECTION THREE A FIVE IMITATION OR SYNTHETIC SYNTHETIC MATERIALS DO NOT USE VINYL SIDING, PLASTIC OR CORRUGATED METAL SHEETING.
VINYL WINDOWS ARE PLASTIC WINDOWS.
THEY DO NOT MIMIC WOOD, THE MATERIAL NOR NORMALLY FOUND IN OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
SECTION SEVEN A TWO MATERIALS UTILIZE GREEN BUILDING MATERIALS SUCH AS RECYCLED, LOCALLY SOURCED, AND NO MAINTENANCE MATERIALS.
WHENEVER POSSIBLE VINYL WINDOWS ARE PLASTIC.
ALL VINYL WINDOWS ARE CONSTRUCTED OF PETROLEUM BASED POLYMERS AND ARE NOT.
GREEN WOOD WINDOWS SEQUESTER CARBON AND THE CREATION OF THE REPLACEMENT COMPONENTS CREATES OXYGEN.
VINYL WINDOWS ARE THE OPPOSITE OF LOW MAINTENANCE.
IT WILL NEED TO BE REPLACED AT BEST EVERY 20 YEARS AND MORE LIKELY IN 10 TO 15 YEARS.
WIND WINDOWS CAN LAST 100 YEARS OR MORE, AS EVIDENCED BY MOST HOMES IN OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
VINYL WINDOWS ARE NOT RECYCLABLE.
VINYL WINDOWS ARE ONLY SLIGHTLY MORE EFFICIENT THAN MODERN, PROPERLY MAINTAINED AND UPGRADED ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS.
WHAT IS A BETTER INSULATOR THAN PLASTIC? THE ONLY THING INSTALLING PLASTIC WINDOWS DOES IS TO SAVE THE BUILDER MONEY WHILE PASSING THE BARRIER NON-GREEN SHORT LIFESPAN PRODUCT ONTO THE BUYER.
PLASTIC WINDOWS DO NOT CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP.
UM, I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT IS STARTING TO
I THINK WE'RE GETTING SOMEWHERE.
I JUST, I WANTED, I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UM, FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OPTION ONE AND TWO WAS THE RIDGE HEIGHT, BUT THEN I ALSO WANTED TO CONFIRM WHAT WAS THE RI WHAT IS THE RIDGE HEIGHT AT THE POINT, UM, OF THE SECOND ROOF.
AND IF THAT'S NOT LOWER THAN THE, THE BACK ROOF, JUST MAKING SURE THAT, AND THEN SECOND, I WAS GONNA SAY THAT I AGREE WITH STAFF ON, UM, ON THE VINYL WINDOWS IS NOT AN OPTION.
I THINK THAT MAYBE YOU CAN, UM, CONSIDER SOME METAL WOOD CLAD WITH WINDOWS, BUT VINYL IS NOT SOMETHING I WOULD, UH, EITHER RECOMMEND OR APPROVE.
UH, ESPECIALLY, I MEAN, WITH THIS DESIGN THAT YOU'VE PUT SO MUCH EFFORT INTO, AND IT LOOKS AMAZING.
I DON'T, I MEAN, I WOULD SAY YOU ARE ALSO GONNA BE HAPPY NOT PUTTING VINYL WINDOWS IN
[00:30:01]
THIS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ THE, UM, UH, APPLICANT HAS, I, I THINK, UH, RE RETURNED.WE, WE'VE HAD, UM, UM, DISCUSSIONS, RIGHT? AND PART OF THAT WAS THAT THEY WERE GONNA COME BACK.
AND SO IT'S, IT'S BEEN A VERY PROACTIVE AND VERY PRODUCTIVE PROCESS, I THINK.
BUT, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, I I I REALLY APPRECIATE THE, THE DRAWING COMMENT THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, AT THE REAR ELEVATION, CLEARLY THE DOORS ARE SITTING ON THE GROUND.
THAT'S A GRAPHIC ISSUE ON FOUNDATION THAT A LINE IS MISSING.
AND I, AND I, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT FROM, FROM THE APPLICANT.
UM, THE, UM, BUT, BUT I, I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S KIND OF A, A SOMETHING FUNDAMENTAL.
I, I HAVE, UM, THE, THE, UH, APPLICATION HERE.
I'M LOOKING AT THE CITY'S, UH, UH, POINTS, UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE, TO THE SETBACK.
I THINK THAT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE ISSUE.
UM, UH, THE, THE, UH, THE, UH, COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT OR THAT IF, IF IT IS AN ISSUE THAT, THAT THE SETBACK IS, IS EASILY RESOLVED ON, ON PART TWO.
UM, I, I CAN'T HELP BUT, BUT, BUT EXPRESS THAT THIS IS NOT A HISTORIC BUILDING.
IT IS A BUILDING IN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT'S A NEW BUILDING.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE, UH, THE CO THE, THE, UM, THE CODE IS PRETTY CLEAR THAT THE, THAT THE, THE, UH, INTENT IS NOT TO RECREATE HISTORIC BUILDINGS IN THAT AREA.
UH, THE, THE, UH, APPLICANT SHOULD BE COMMENDED REALLY FOR, UH, UM, TAKING COMMENTS AND, AND, AND MAKING ADJUSTMENTS AND STILL PRESERVING THE INTEGRITY OF THE DESIGN THAT IS BEING PRESENTED.
SO OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW THAT THIS IS A NEW DESIGN THAT IS BEING PRESENTED THAT TAKES ELEMENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IS, IS UNIQUELY COMPILED, UH, UH, UH, UH, TO, TO CREATE SOMETHING NEW.
THIS IS CLEARLY NOT A PROJECT THAT IS BEING PRESENTED BY A NOVUS.
IT'S, IT'S A PROJECT THAT IS ARCHITECTED.
I MEAN, AND, AND IT, AND IT FOLLOWS THE, THE RULES OF PROPORTION AND, AND CAREFUL PLACEMENT.
IT, IT, IT IS, UM, UH, A, A, A GOOD PRODUCT AND MOST DEFINITELY POTENTIALLY A, A, A WONDERFUL ATTRIBUTE TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THE OTHER THING CO COMING TO, UH, ITEM ITEM FOUR, THAT, THAT TALKS ABOUT FENESTRATION, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT, THAT IT CAN BE JUDGED BASED ON HOW YOU SEE A WINDOW PLACED IN A TYPICAL BUILDING OVER THERE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT A, AT, AT THE PLAN, AT THE FLOOR PLAN OF A TRADITIONAL AMERICAN HOUSE IN THE 1940S AND 1930S, THE, THE, THE WINDOWS ARE GONNA RELATE TO THE INTERIOR OF THE SPACE, WHICH MEANS THAT YOU'RE EITHER GONNA FIND WINDOWS, UH, UH, OFFSET FROM THE CORNERS OF EACH WALL OR IN THE CENTER OF EACH ROOM.
SO IT'S NOT EASY ENOUGH TO SAY THAT, THAT THE WINDOWS DON'T MATCH OTHER WINDOW, UH, PATTERNS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS A UNIQUE CONSTRUCT AND IT'S, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THE FLOOR PLAN IS UNIQUE IN ITSELF.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A MUCH MORE MODERN INTERPRETATION OF, OF THE HOME.
UH, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DIMENSION OF THE WINDOWS, THESE ARE NOT TINY WINDOWS EITHER.
THESE ARE, THESE ARE SUBSTANTIAL WINDOWS THAT I'M SURE SPEAK TO THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE AND, AND, AND, AND, UH, AND, AND HAVE, HAVE, IT'S, UH, IT'S MORE IMPORTANT POINTS, I THINK ARE, ARE FINDING A BALANCE IN WHAT YOU SEE IN THE FRONT, WHAT YOU SEE IN, IN, AT THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, BUT ON THE SIDES IS CLEARLY SPEAKING ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE.
SO I, I, I ALSO SAY THAT WITH RESPECT TO THAT FOOT, I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT MADE A COMMENT THAT I THINK IS UNFORTUNATE THAT APPLICANTS HAVE TO MAKE A COMMENT LIKE THAT AND SAY, WELL, IT'S 21, BUT IF, IF, UH, IF IT MEANS SINKING THIS PROJECT, YOU KNOW, THEN I'LL MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, WHAT WE'RE SAYING THAT IT NEEDS TO BE WHEN CLEARLY THIS IS THE DESIGN PRODUCT.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANY DIMENSION IN THIS HOUSE THAT HASN'T BEEN WELL THOUGHT OF, THAT IF WE WERE TO SAY IT HAS TO BE THIS VERSUS THAT, AND WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT A TOLERANCE OF A FOOT, THAT WE WOULD BE RUINING SOMETHING THAT OTHERWISE IS PROPORTIONED PERFECTLY.
SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK THE DECISION IS A VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD DECISION THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE, I THINK, I THINK A, A LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE, BE, UH, PRESENTED THAT TELLS A, AN APPLICANT THAT THEIR HOUSE IS EITHER GOOD OR IT'S NOT GOOD.
BUT THIS IDEA THAT THEY'RE GONNA TWEAK THIS AND TWEAK
[00:35:01]
THAT TO MAKE IT FIT, IT ONLY MAKES GOOD ARCHITECTURE, BAD ARCHITECTURE.SO I, I WOULD SAY THAT ON ITS BASE, IT, IT IS A WELL-BALANCED END RESULT AND THAT THE FOUR ITEMS PRESENTED BY STAFF, UH, TWO ARE VERY SUBJECTIVE.
AND I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD LEAN ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, LEAN ON THE SIDE OF THE DESIGNER, WHO IS CLEARLY A PROFESSIONAL AND THOUGHTFUL AND ITEM ONE.
UM, THAT'S, THAT, THAT CAN, THAT REALLY IS SOMETHING THAT CAN GO EITHER WAY.
AND ITEM THREE, I THINK HAS BEEN DEALT WITH THAT, THAT IS A GRAPHIC ISSUE, AND, UM, THAT REALLY THE, THE, UH, THAT MAYBE THERE, THERE, THERE NEED TO BE SOME NEW PRECEDENTS SET FOR VISITING THE DESIGN PROCESS.
UH, AND NOT, NOT NITPICKING BECAUSE I, I, I THINK I SEE TOO MUCH OF THE, OF THE, OF THE SMALL THINGS, UH, TWEAK GOOD PROPORTION INTO BAD PROPORTION JUST BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST A HABIT.
UM, SO I I I WOULD BE VERY, UH, UH, I WOULD, I WOULD SUPPORT, UH, THIS REQUEST AND I WOULD STRONGLY, I IMPLORE, UH, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO, TO DO THE SAME.
COULD I PLEASE GET A REPORT FROM THE LAST D R C? I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANY, RIGHT.
I THINK WE MET, WE HAD HER ON THE AGENDA TWO WEEKS AGO.
UM, THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MET LAST TO REVIEW THIS REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL.
UH, THE APPLICANT RECEIVED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AND THIS APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED MOST RECENTLY FOR FILE APPROVAL.
I'M SORRY, I MUST HAVE BEEN CONFUSED.
UM, I'D ALSO, AND TO CLARIFY THE, GO AHEAD, EDWARD.
OH, UH, UH, COREY AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE WINDOWS, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED AND NOTED THAT THEY CAN INSTALL A WOOD WINDOW.
THIS WOOD WINDOW, UM, THAT STARTS, I BELIEVE IT'S 26 OF THE APPLICATION PACKAGE WITH THE, UH, CUT SHEET ON PAGE.
UM, THE CUT SHEET IS LOCATED ON PAGE 36.
THIS WOOD WINDOW IS CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS FOR WINDOWS AND CONSTRUCTION.
UM, AND THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED THAT THEY CAN INSTALL THIS.
HOWEVER, UM, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO NOTED, UM, THAT SHE WOULD LIKE THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER A VINYL A WINDOW.
I JUST WANT TO REITERATE TO THE COMMISSION, UM, STAFF'S COMMENTS.
AND THE REASON WHY THERE'S NOT A STIPULATION FOR WINDOWS IN STAFF'S COMMENTS IS BECAUSE STAFF REFERENCES IN THE FINDINGS, THIS JELLED ONE PRODUCT, THIS WOOD WINDOW THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION.
AND, AND, AND MR. CHAIRMAN, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY MY, MY COMMENTS WITH RESPECT TO, UM, UH, THE ITEM FOUR, UH, AND THE DISCUSSION OF THE VINYL VERSUS THE WOOD.
I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMISSION'S, UH, UH, UH, PERSPECTIVE ON THE WINDOWS, I'M NOT, I'M NOT TRYING TO, TO GET INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE.
UM, BUT MORE ABOUT THE FENESTRATION, THE AMOUNT OF FENESTRATION ENFORCING IN FENESTRATION WHERE IT'S ALREADY BEEN FENESTRATION, WHERE IT'S ALREADY BEEN CLEARLY THOUGHT OF WHERE FENESTRATION BELONGS.
THANK YOU, UH, TO STAFF TO CLARIFY STIPULATION NUMBER FOUR.
I I, I MEAN, THESE STIPULATIONS HAVE BEEN ON THAT, ON THIS CASE EVERY TIME.
IT IS BECAUSE SOME IN THE DRAWINGS, SOME OF THEM DON'T KNOW PROPORTIONATE, RIGHT? THE TOP PART ON THE BOTTOM PART, AND WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE PROPORTIONATE AS WELL.
UH, WELL, IF WE LOOK, IF WE LOOK AT, UM, STAFF IS SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO, UH, THE ELE EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS THAT ARE ON PAGE 13 IN THE APPLICATION PACKAGE, UH, COMMONLY, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS AND CONSISTENTLY STAFF RECOMMENDS, UH, THAT FENESTRATION BE DESIGNED IN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THAT WHICH IS FOUND HISTORICALLY IN THE DISTRICT, UH, TOWARD THE FRONT FACADE OF THIS HOUSE.
UM, THIS IS WHERE STAFF IS JUST REQUESTING OR NOTING THAT ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION WOULD BE FOUND HISTORICALLY IN THESE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND STAFF FINDS THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IF IT'S INSTALLED, UM, IN, IN THESE LOCATIONS HERE WITHIN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE WEST ELEVATION, THERE ARE WINDOWS THAT ARE PLACED, UH, CONSISTENTLY WITH THE GUIDELINES JUST NOT FOUND, UM, IN, IN REGARDS TO THE EAST ELEVATION.
BUT COMMISSIONER GRUBE, YOU'RE ALSO RIGHT.
UM, LAUREN, IF YOU CAN GO TO PAGE 18.
[00:40:01]
RENDERINGS ON FRIDAY, AND SO WE, LIKE, LIKE EDWARD SAID, WE REVIEWED A WOOD PRODUCT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET, UM, THAT WE, THAT MEETS THE STIPULATION THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, UM, WHICH IS TO CONFORM WITH THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WINDOWS.AND THAT DOES INCLUDE THE SAME DIMENSION, TOP AND BOTTOM SASH.
AND SO YOU CAN SEE HERE, UH, THE TOP SASH IS TALLER THAN THE BOTTOM.
AND SO WE WOULD LOOK FOR A STIPULATION IF THIS WERE TO MOVE FORWARD.
THAT DOES, AGAIN, ADDRESS THE WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS.
IT'S NOT ADDRESSED IN THIS RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE WHAT WE REVIEWED WAS A WOOD WINDOW THAT MET THE SPEC SPECIFICATIONS.
AND SO WE PROBABLY NEED TO CONTINUE THAT, UM, MOVING ACTION ON THIS CASE.
YEAH, AND I THINK THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY IS AWARE OF THAT AND, AND SHE JUST DIDN'T CHANGE THE DRAWINGS, WHICH I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED SEVERAL TIMES.
BUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE JUST FOR RECORD KEEPING AND, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE GET THAT WE KEEP THAT STIPULATION IN THERE.
ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT HAS NO INTENTIONS OF HAVING DIFFERENT PROPORTION PROPORTIONS ON THE TOP AND BOTTOM.
UM, THE STIPULATION NUMBER ONE HAS BEEN DISCUSSED MANY TIMES.
UM, STAFF HAS TO PUT IT THERE, BUT WE ALL AGREE THAT, AND I THINK WE'VE SEEN A D R C SEVERAL TIMES IS BECAUSE OF THAT BIG TREE.
UM, AND I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH THAT EITHER.
UM, I, I, I FEEL LIKE THE APPLICANT HAS IMPROVED THE FRONT ELEVATION AND OPTION, UH, NOT THIS, UH, WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN, BUT EITHER OPTION ONE OR TWO, IS THERE A SPECIFIC PREFERENCE TO THE APPLICANT FOR OPTION ONE OR TWO? UH, WELL, I PREFER THE OPTION ONE BECAUSE IT'S 22 FOOT HIGH AND IT, UM, AND RESULTS IN A NINE FOOT CEILING, WHICH IF I GO WITH OPTION TWO, WHICH IS 21 FOOT, UM, UM, WHICH HARD, SORRY.
UM, IT'S GONNA GIVE ME, UM, EIGHT FOOD CEILINGS AND, UM, WELL, I PREFER TO BRING MORE QUALITY TO THE INTERIOR SPACE IF I CAN HAVE A KIND OF LIKE A HIGHER CEILING.
SO WHAT DID WE HAVE BEFORE? AND THAT'S KIND OF BACK TO MY QUESTION THAT I HAD BEFORE.
I WANTED TO KNOW WHAT WAS IT THAT WE HAD BEFORE 21 OR 22? IT WAS 22.
OKAY, THAT'S OKAY WITH THE HEIGHT.
THIS THE LAST I, I'M GLAD THAT YOU'RE ALL RIGHT WITH THAT HEIGHT.
I, I DO THINK THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IF, IF COREY, OR I DON'T KNOW IF COREY EDWARD CAN GO TO THE FRONT ELEVATION, OH, THERE, THERE IT IS RIGHT THERE.
THE, THE, UM, I, I THINK SOME ATTENTION, UH, IT'S WORTH PUTTING ATTENTION TO, TO WHAT'S BEEN ACHIEVED WITH THESE WINDOWS.
WHEN I LOOK AT THE WINDOW AND THE OFFSET FROM CENTER, THE, THE DIMENSIONS OF THE HOUSE, THE SLOPE, IT, IT IS KIND OF ASKING FOR THAT LINE NOT TO BE IN THE CENTER ON THE MUL END OF THE WINDOW.
THAT, THAT THE LOWER LINE, UH, SETS A BALANCE ALMOST AS IF YOU'RE HUMANIZING THE, THE HEIGHT WHEN, WHEN THE WINDOW TRIES TO BECOME MORE TRADITIONAL, IT CREATES A DISCORD BETWEEN WHAT THE HOUSE IS ACTUALLY DOING AND, AND WHAT WOULD BE HISTORICALLY FOUND.
I THINK THERE'S ENOUGH OF A DIALOGUE OCCURRING WITH THE, WITH THE TYPE OF WINDOW, THE, THE, THE WAY THE WINDOW IS SET IN AND THE FACT THAT IT HAS THAT MILLION, THAT IT'S NOT JUST A, YOU KNOW, PLATE GLASS, THAT IT, IT CREATES ITS OWN ITS OWN NARRATIVE AND IT, AND IT SEEMS TO BE MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT LINE TO BE OFFSET THEN FOR IT TO BE TRADITIONAL IN THE CENTER OF THAT WINDOW.
UH, THE, UH, THE NOTE, UH, THAT, UH, I THINK IS NOTE M STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED MASS FORM PRODUCED FENESTRATIONS PROPORTIONAL THAT APPEAR LACKING IN SIZE AND QUANTITY.
IT IS KIND OF, YOU KNOW, A, A A, A CONVERSATION OF, OF PEOPLE WHO THINK THEY KNOW BETTER.
NOW THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE YOU SHOULD THINK YOU KNOW BETTER, RIGHT? BUT THEN WE HAVE TWO, TWO DIFFERENT CAMPS, RIGHT? STAFF THAT KNOWS BETTER AND THE DESIGNER THAT KNOWS BETTER.
AND I, I THINK IN THAT DIALOGUE, UM, STAFF NEEDS TO, I, I THINK, UH, UH, UNDERSTAND THE PROPORTIONS OF WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED AND THAT IN THIS CASE, I THINK THE DESIGNER KNOWS BETTER.
UM, AND, AND THEN YOU CAN FEEL THAT.
AND IF YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT PUT THE LINES IN THE CENTER, I DON'T THINK THEY NEED TO BE DRAWN.
JUST PUT THE LINE IN THE CENTER AND YOU CAN SEE HOW ALL OF A SUDDEN THE HOUSE STARTS TO GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.
UH, AND THEN THAT'S, IT'S QUITE A LOT TO TALK ABOUT WHERE A LINE GOES, BUT I, I, I, I JUST, UH, UH, FEEL LIKE THIS IS A BETTER HOUSE WITH THE WINDOWS WHERE THEY ARE EXACTLY AS
[00:45:01]
PROPOSED WITH THE 22 FOOT CEILING.THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UM, JUST TO WEIGH IN ON THIS ONE, I THINK, UM, I, UM, AM OKAY, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH ITEM ONE.
I'D RATHER PRESERVE THAT TREE IN THE BACKYARD, UM, AND, AND DISREGARD THAT, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AND ITEM THREE, UH, REALLY I THINK THE PERCEPTUAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, UH, ONE FOOT FOR THAT RIDGE THAT FAR BACK ON THE, UH, ON THE SITE IS GOING TO BE MINERAL, NOT IF NOTICEABLE AT ALL.
SO FOR THE QUALITY OF THE SPACES ON THE SECOND STORY, I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR, UH, ACCEPTING, UH, THE, THE 22 FOOT RIDGE HEIGHT FOR ITEMS TWO AND FOUR.
HOWEVER, I, I HAVE TO BEG TO DIFFER A LITTLE BIT WITH THE FELLOW COMMISSIONER, 'CAUSE I THINK, UH, STAFF DOES HAVE IT RIGHT.
AND SO DOES THE, UH, SAN ANTONIO CONSERVATION SOCIETY REGARDING THE PROPORTIONS THAT ARE STILL BEING GENERATED BY THIS ARE, ARE, UH, IN CONFLICT WITH, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I THINK THE NUMBER OF WINDOWS, UH, IS VERY MUCH IN CONFLICT, PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE AREAS THAT ARE UP CLOSE TO THE STREET WHERE YOU WILL HAVE AN OBLIQUE VIEW AND THAT YOU WOULD SEE, UH, EXPANSES OF WALL THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY EXPECT TO HAVE A WINDOW IN NOT HAVING A WINDOW IN.
SO AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE THAT BEDROOM THAT'S ON, ON THE FRONT, ON THE, IN THE, UH, FRONT ELEVATIONS ON THE, UH, ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
I, I THINK THAT'S THE NORTH SIDE.
NO, THAT WOULD BE THE, UH, I GUESS THAT'S ON THE EAST SIDE OF, OF THE, THE BUILDING.
UH, MO MOST NORMALLY YOU WOULD HAVE MORE THAN JUST ONE WINDOW IN A BEDROOM LIKE THAT.
IN FACT, THE QUALITY OF SPACE WOULD BE HIGHLY, UH, IMPROVED BY HAVING LIGHT COMING IN ON TWO SIDES OF A SPACE, EVEN IF IT'S A SMALL SPACE, UH, RATHER THAN HAVING IT A SILHOUETTE JUST FROM ONE WINDOW ON THE FRONT.
AND SO I, I TAKE STRONG, UM, UH, OBJECTION TO THAT THE DESIGNER KNOWS BETTER, AND THEREFORE WE SHOULD JUST ROLL OVER ON THAT ISSUE.
I THINK, UH, IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT EXPECTED FENESTRATION THAT GIVES SCALE, THAT BREAKS UP THE EXPANSIVE SIDING, PARTICULARLY UP TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE STREET WHERE IT CAN BE, BE, UH, SEEN IN THE OVERLY VIEWS.
I'M LESS CONCERNED ABOUT THE BACK ELEVATION AND EVEN LESS CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, UH, THE SIDE ELEVATIONS ONCE YOU KIND OF GET BEYOND THE FENCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO I THINK THAT IS AN IMPORTANT, UH, IT'S NOT JUST A NUANCE, IT'S AN IMPORTANT ASPECT.
NOW THESE, THESE NEIGHBORING BUILDINGS, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD THOSE WINDOWS ON MULTIPLE SIDES FOR A REASON BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE AIR CONDITIONING.
AND TO GET CROSS VENTILATION THROUGH THE SPACE AS WELL AS NATURAL LIGHT, UH, WAS PRETTY IMPORTANT.
SO THAT GENERATES A CERTAIN KIND OF CHARACTER, UH, AND A CERTAIN, UH, LANGUAGE OF ARCHITECTURE THAT, UH, GOES BEYOND THIS SORT OF, THIS AESTHETIC DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW CONTEMPORARY THE DESIGN IS.
AND SO I WOULD ADVOCATE AND FEEL STRONGLY THAT STAFF'S COMMENT ON THAT IS, IS RIGHT ON THE MONEY, AND THE, THE ARCHITECT SHOULD CONSIDER, UM, ADDING ADDITIONAL WINDOWS, PARTICULARLY TO THOSE ROOMS UP FRONT.
I AGREE WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, AND, UM, ACTUALLY, UM, I MEAN, THERE IS A KIND OF A PLAN TO PUT A FENCE AND ALL THAT.
IF THE HOUSE WAS LOWER AND, AND DIDN'T HAVE NINE FOOT CEILINGS, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE LESS VISIBLE.
BUT BECAUSE THAT TALL, I MEAN, THE HOUSE WILL BE PRETTY TALL AND HAVE THE NINE FOOT, I THINK IT'S EVEN MORE IMPORTANT, UM, IS THAT SOMETHING THE APPLICANT WOULD BE WILLING TO DO TO ADD THAT WINDOW? SO KIND OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS, UH, WITH THIS, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THIS PROJECT MOVING FORWARD.
SO YOU DO UNDERSTAND, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS PICTURE RIGHT NOW, UH, THESE THREE LITTLE, UH, WINDOW NUMBER 13, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE USUALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, ESPECIALLY IN THE FRONT OF THE HOME.
COULD THAT BE REUSABLE FROM THE STREET, BUT MORE SOMETHING, UH, WINDOWS THAT ARE MORE, UH, ALIGNED WITH WINDOW AND FIVE AND FOUR, I GUESS? UH, BUT THE NUMBERS ARE RIGHT, FIVE, I THINK WINDOW FIVE, YEAH.
UH, THOSE THREE WINDOWS ARE JUST, UM, BEEN, UM, CONSIDERED TO USE FOR LIKE A SPACES LIKE BATHROOM, LIKE THESE TYPE OF SPACES THAT THEY DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE A BIG WINDOW, BUT THEY'RE LIKE HAVING A SMALL WINDOW FOR LIKE, UM, UM, BETTER VENTILATION AND ALSO, UM, AN APPROPRIATE LIGHTING.
BUT THESE WINDOWS ARE LIKE TWO BY THREE.
AND, UM, I WOULD, UH, I WOULD PREFER TO KIND OF LIKE, UM, LET THE
[00:50:01]
NATURAL LIGHT ENTER INTO THESE SMALLER SPACES.UH, BUT I WOULD DEFINITELY, UH, BE, UM, ALL RIGHT WITH ADDING ANOTHER WINDOW, UH, FOR THIS BEDROOM, UM, LIKE THE BEDROOM IN THE FRONT, UH, TO, UM, MAKE A BETTER PROPORTION.
AND, UM, IF IT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, ACCEPTABLE, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO KEEP THOSE THREE SMALLER WINDOWS BECAUSE, UM, UH, SO HERE WE ARE AGAIN.
SO THIS IS KIND OF THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE RUNNING INTO A LOT, IS THAT YOU WANT BOTH, RIGHT? SO WE'RE TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOME SOLUTIONS AND SOME SUGGESTIONS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU SAY YOU ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT NO, WHICH I'M FINE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE VERY, VERY CLEAR BECAUSE, UM, WE'VE GONE THROUGH MANY DRCS AND MANY HRCS, AND I REALLY WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO GET A FINAL APPROVAL, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE UNDERSTANDING AND WE ARE BOTH ON THE RIGHT PAGE, BECAUSE I THINK THAT SOMETIMES SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE GIVEN YOU, YOU'VE TAKEN THEM, BUT HAVE NOT WANTING TO ACCEPT THEM AND THEN COME BACK AGAIN.
JUST, I MEAN, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT GOING BACK AND FORTH AND, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THINGS THAT MAYBE WE WON'T BE ABLE TO, UH, YOU KNOW, REALLY DO A, A FINAL APPROVAL UNTIL WE ACTUALLY SEE IT ON THE DRAWINGS.
MAYBE IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, BUT THEN I DON'T WANNA HAVE TO PUSH YOU AGAIN TO ANOTHER MEETING.
YEAH, I WOULD, UM, DEFINITELY CHANGE THE WINDOWS, UH, COMM, COMMISSIONER, GRU, OR, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO JUST CLAR GET A CLARIFICATION.
COMMISSIONER GRUBER, IS THE CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE HAVING ONLY SPEAKING ABOUT A WINDOW LIKE FIVE DASH FOUR IN BEDROOM SIX, THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING, THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, RIGHT? IS TO ADD A, A WINDOW.
WELL, WHAT I WOULD DO IS I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A STIPULATION SAYING THAT WOULD ADDING FENESTRATION TOWARDS THE FRONT ON BOTH EAST AND WEST SIDE ELEVATION TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, AND THEN LEAVE IT TO, TO STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES.
AND, AND, AND WHAT I KNOW, AND FROM THE GUIDELINES AND FROM WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW, THAT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THOSE THREE WINDOWS ON THE TOP.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING ADDING A WINDOW SIMILAR TO NUMBER FIVE, I WOULD ASSUME.
SO, SO, SO THEN THE TO ROOM TWO, LIVING, ROOM TWO AND BEDROOM SIX WITH STAFF, UM, UH, USING ITS DISCRETION, TALKING ABOUT, UH, THE ADDITION OF WINDOWS OF, OF WINDOWS THAT MATCH FIVE DASH FOUR, RIGHT, THAT SCALE.
SO WHEN WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE LITTLE WINDOWS, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THAT ROOM TWO AND ROOM SIX GET ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION THAT MATCH THAT BIG WINDOW.
THAT'S WHAT THERE CURRENT IS ON THOSE ELEVATIONS.
YEAH, THOSE ARE, THAT'S THE EAST AND THE WEST ELEVATION.
UH, LIVING ROOM TWO, LIVING ROOM SIX, AND THE BIG WINDOW IS THE SEVEN FOOT WINDOW.
I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT BECAUSE I, I, I, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A STAB AT A MOTION.
UNLESS ANYBODY THINKS IT'S PREMATURE.
BUT I WOULD, UH, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, APPROVE, UH, TO, TO, TO GIVE FINAL APPROVAL, UH, INCLUDING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
ONE THAT, THAT IS, UH, SETBACK TO PRESERVE A TREE, RIGHT? PRESERVE THE TREE, UM, WITH RESPECT TO, TO TWO, UH, UH, UH, THAT THE TWO IS, IS ACCEPTING THE, THE 22 FOOT ELEVATION, UH, WITH, UH, UH, THREE AS HAS BEEN RESOLVED BY THE, BY THE, UH, WITHOUT THREE AS, UH, STIPULATED BY THE, BY THE APPLICANT, WHO'S, WHO'S SAYING THAT THAT'S A DRAWING ISSUE, OF COURSE, STAFF TO, TO VERIFY, RIGHT? AND, AND WITH FOUR, UH, UM, SPECIFICALLY THE ADDITION OF WINDOWS IN THE LIVING ROOM, IN THE FRONT LIVING ROOM AND THE FRONT BEDROOM AS GUIDED BY STAFF.
AND THEN, AND LET ME JUST CLARIFY, YOU ARE REMOVING STIPULATION NUMBER ONE BECAUSE WE'RE IN AGREEMENT OF THE SETBACK THAT IS
[00:55:01]
PRESENTED TODAY, AND YOU ARE ALSO REMOVING ITEM NUMBER TWO, STIPULATION NUMBER TWO, BECAUSE YOU WOULD LIKE FOR HER TO GET APPROVED AS SUBMITTED TODAY.THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED TWO OPTIONS, AND INSTEAD SHE PREFERRED THE OPTION ONE WITH THE 22.
SO WE'LL PROBABLY DO AS SUBMITTED IN OPTION ONE.
AND THEN WE'LL LEAVE OPTION THREE, EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT AGREES WITH IT.
AND, AND THEN OPTION FOUR IS THE INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION IN ROOM 1 0 2 AND 1 0 6 ON THE EAST AND THE WEST ELEVATION, ALONG THE LINES OF MR. CARPENTER'S, UH, COMMISSION CARPENTER.
AND CAN I JUST ADD THAT, THAT ON THE FENESTRATIONS TO MAKE SURE THE OVERALL PROPORTION IS EQUAL, TOP AND BOTTOM, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, JUST FOR, TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN WRITING IT'S A LITTLE TOUGHER BECAUSE IF, IF, IF, IF THEY'RE ADDING, UM, I MEAN, THE LIVING ROOM COULD BE A BIT IF STAFF, IF IT WAS WITH, WITHIN THE WELLAND, THE WINDOWS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, PROPOSED WITH THE, WITH THE WINDOWS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED, BECAUSE THE DESIGN IS
UH, ITEM NUMBER FOUR AS SUBMITTED WITH, UH, STAFF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, SPECIFICALLY ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION ON THE, UH, IN, I WOULD SAY IN ROOM 1 0 6 AND 1 0 2, UM, UM, WITH, OF COURSE, IT'S STAFF'S DISCRETION RIGHT ON HOW, WHERE THEY FEEL THAT THE BALANCE IS, BUT SPECIFICALLY THAT SEVEN FOOT WINDOW OR THE WINDOW TO MATCH THE EXISTING WINDOW IN THE LIVING ROOM AND THE FRONT WINDOWS IN THE, IN THE, UH, BEDROOM, WHICH ARE THE SEVEN FOOT WINDOW.
UM, IS THAT TWO MUD MOTIONS? NO, NO, I THINK WE'RE GOOD.
WE STILL WOULD LIKE SOME DIRECTION REGARDING THE MATERIAL.
REGARDING WHICH ONE WINDOW MATERIAL.
OH, WELL, UM, I, I, UH, I, IT'S NOT ONE OF THE, IT'S NOT ONE OF THE FINDINGS HERE OR ONE OF THE RECOMMENDED PIECES.
CAN WE INCLUDE THAT IF IT'S NOT, UH, ABSOLUTELY YES.
UM, SO WE, IN OUR FINDINGS, REVIEWED A WOOD WINDOW IN THE PACKET.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO PROPOSED A VINYL WINDOW, WHICH IS NOT REVIEWED.
UM, SO WE DID NOT ADDRESS IT IN THESE RECOMMENDED STIPULATIONS, BUT YOU ARE FREE TO ADD A STIPULATION.
AND NOW THE GEN WHEEL WINDOW THAT YOU HAVE IN HERE IS, IS A, IS, IT'S NOT THE VINYL, UH, CLAD WINDOW, IS IT? SO IT DOESN'T, NO, THE GELDWIN WINDOW, THAT'S NOTED ON PAGE 37, 36 IS THE WOOD WINDOW THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS FOR SPEC, FOR WINDOWS AND CONSTRUCTION.
WELL, AND I, AND I WOULD ADD TO FOR, UH, SPECIFICALLY THE WINDOWS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT IN THIS APPLICATION.
SO IF THE APPLICANT WANTED TO COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT, UH, VITAL WITNESS, THAT HAS TO BE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CONVERSATION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
UH, I DON'T THINK I CAN SUPPORT THIS MOTION TODAY.
I, I, I'M, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE CONTEXT OF THE, UH, THE SCALE OF THE FRONT PORCH.
I THINK, UH, CONTEMPORARY DESIGN CAN BE COMPATIBLE IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS, AND THAT THE FRONT PORCH IS, IS KIND OF A TWO STORY SCALED FRONT PORCH, PRETENDING TO BE A SINGLE STORY FRONT PORCH ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS HOUSE.
WE'VE GOT A SINGLE STORY STRUCTURE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
WE HAVE A, A, A LARGER STRUCTURE.
SO I'M STRUGGLING WITH, UH, SOME OF THOSE FRONT PORCH ELEMENTS, AND THAT'S WHY I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS IT STANDS.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, WE'RE IN DISCUSSION.
I JUST, UH, WANNA REMIND, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH THAT THAT SOLUTION CAME OUT OF THE LAST MEETING.
I DON'T, I DON'T RECALL WHO ALTERED THE, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE THEORY THAT THAT'S A BETTER SOLUTION.
IT'S A BALANCED, UH, I MEAN, IT IS A, IT'S A GOOD EFFORT TO, TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, THAT, UH, THAT PORCH.
BUT I, I'M, I, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'RE VERY CLEAR THAT THE APPLICANT RESPONDED TO A DIALOGUE THAT I REMEMBER WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A, OF, OF AN OFFICIAL MEETING.
I, I DON'T THINK I SUPPORTED THE, THE PREVIOUS, UH, CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL EITHER BECAUSE OF THOSE SAME
[01:00:01]
CONCERNS, AND, AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THEY WERE, UH, DISCUSSED AT LENGTH, ALTHOUGH THE ISSUES THAT RE RELATED TO THE FRONT PORCH HAD BEEN DISCUSSED AT LENGTH.AND TO ME, THE, THE CHANGE THAT HAS HAPPENED FROM THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, UH, PRIOR TO CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AND AFTER CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL IS, IS MOST FUNDAMENTALLY REPRESENTED IN THE SLIGHT DROP WITH THE FRONT PORCH ELEMENT.
UM, AND THAT'S, I THINK MY POSITION HAS BEEN CONSISTENT AND, UH, THAT'S WHY THERE ARE 10 OF US HERE, OR EIGHT OF US HERE TODAY.
SO I, I APPRECIATE THOSE, UH, COMMENTS.
AND I DO RECALL THEM BEING DISCUSSED AT LENGTH, UH, IN THE PREVIOUS HEARING, AND MY POSITION JUST HASN'T, HASN'T CHANGED FROM THAT.
MAY WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? I THINK SHE HAS STEPPED AWAY.
UM, ARE WE, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, ARE WE ABLE TO HAVE DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT, OR DOES A MOTION HAVE TO OCCUR FIRST? WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSION.
I'M JUST GONNA SAY THAT WE'VE HAD THIS CASE MANY TIMES TO D R C, AND I THINK THAT WE'RE STILL FAR FROM COMING, I KNOW, TO A SOLUTION WITH THE APPLICANT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THIS FORM TODAY WILL COME TO A SOLUTION SINCE SHE'S ALREADY RECEIVED CONCEPTUAL, SO PROBABLY I WOULD PROBABLY SUGGEST ANOTHER REVIEW.
I, I, I, I'D JUST LIKE TO, TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT, UM, I WOULD PROBABLY LIKE TO MAKE MANY TIMES AFTER THIS AND BEFORE IT AS WELL, BUT THERE, THERE, I THINK THERE'S A, A, A POINT OF DEPARTURE FROM TELLING A, AN APPLICANT OR A CITIZEN OF THE CITY THAT LIVES IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH A NEW PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT HAS NOTHING ON IT, THAT THEY WILL PRODUCE A TRADITIONAL HOUSE, OR THAT THEY WILL EMPLOY THEIR SKILLS TO DESIGN.
A STATEMENT THAT IS IN CONCERT IS COMPLIMENTARY TO A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DRIVES A HIGH STANDARD OF DESIGN.
UH, THE APPLICANT HAS MENTIONED CULTURAL DIFFERENCES OR EXPECTATIONS FROM, UH, YOU KNOW, THE OUTCOME OF, OF THE PROCESS, BUT IT, IT'S, IT'S, IT BECOMES VERY, UM, DISINGENUOUS.
AND I DON'T MEAN THAT IN A DISRESPECTFUL WAY, BUT IT BECOMES DISINGENUOUS TO, TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE EASIEST SOLUTION IS A BUNGALOW.
AND I, I'M NOT SURE THAT THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT A PORCH IS, A PORCH IS A PORCH.
THERE, THERE ARE, THERE ARE, THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO EMPLOY SKILL AND PROPORTION.
AND I, I BELIEVE THAT IT IS INCUMBENT ON THIS COMMISSION TO DISCOVER THAT, THAT THE NEW FRONTIER THAT IS ALLOWABLE AND A MEANS BY WHICH TO UNDERSTAND AND, AND, AND FIND IT ACCEPTABLE.
BECAUSE OTHERWISE THERE, THERE NEEDS TO BE A STRAIGHTFORWARD ANSWER THAT PRESENTS ILLUSTRATIONS THAT SAYS IT MUST LOOK LIKE THIS.
UH, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, AND I'VE BEEN IN A COUPLE OF THE D R C MEETINGS AND, UM, DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAVE HAD, UH, LED TO THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, LAST COMMISSION
[01:05:01]
MEETING, AND HAVE LED TO THIS, UH, SUBMISSION TODAY.AND, UH, SINCE WE'RE BASICALLY SPLIT ON THIS, I WOULD, UH, CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER GRU THAT, UH, PERHAPS THIS GO BACK TO THE D R C AND THAT, UH, SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS WHO HAVE OBJECTIONS TO THIS DESIGN, WE MAKE AN EFFORT TO BE THERE AS WELL TO DISCUSS, UH, WHAT THEIR MAIN CONCERNS ARE.
UM, MAY I MAKE A STATEMENT? YES, MA'AM.
UM, I WANTED TO ASK, UM, WHAT CAN I DO, UM, TO GET A, UM, LIKE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TODAY? BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN IN THIS PROCESS SINCE LAST OCTOBER, AND IT'S JUST, UM, SINCE JUNE THAT I'VE BEEN STRUGGLING WITH THIS DESIGN BACK AND FORTH, AND I'VE TRIED TO, UM, ACCOMPLISH, UM, LIKE AS, AND MAKE IT AS CLOSE AS, UM, I'VE BEEN POSSIBLE TO, UM, THE, UH, QUALITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND, UH, LIKE, OR, OR FINANCE, LIKE, UM, OR BANK APPROVAL IS ON THE LINE AND OR BUILDER AND EVERYTHING IS JUST ON THE LINE.
AND, UM, AND WE ARE, UM, REALLY, I'M REALLY, YOU KNOW, PUTTING ALL MY EFFORTS INTO MAKING THIS APPROPRIATE.
AND, UM, I JUST WANTED TO, I ASK LIKE, WHAT CAN I DO IN THIS, UM, LAST MOMENT TO MAYBE GET AN APPROVAL THIS TIME? UH, SO, UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, AND, UH, WHAT I'D LIKE TO, TO ASK IS TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT YOU WERE NOT OKAY WITH THE PREVIOUS MOTION.
IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO AS A COMPROMISE THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE SOME OF YOUR CONCERNS, UM, THAT MAYBE COULD BE HANDLED BY STAFF AT THIS POINT.
IS THERE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE COULD DISCUSS TODAY TO, UH, AMEND THAT PREVIOUS MOTION TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN? THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UM, I DON'T THINK SO BECAUSE I THINK THE SAME, UH, FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES OF PROPORTION SCALE THAT I'VE COMMENTED ON EACH TIME AS WELL, UM, HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.
THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, ADJUSTMENTS, YES, THERE HAVE BEEN MODIFICATIONS.
UM, AND I DON'T THINK IT IS THE EASIEST THING IN THE WORLD TO JUST DO A BUNGALOW, I THINK TO DO A CONTEMPORARY, UH, INTERPRETATION OF THE BUNGALOW AND ITS SCALE AND THAT SORT OF THING IS, UH, ACTUALLY PRETTY TRICKY.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT DOES REQUIRE A LOT OF SKILL, AND I THINK IT'S TELLING THAT THERE'S NOT EVEN A HUMAN SCALE FIGURE IN THIS FRONT ELEVATION TO REALLY SHOW YOU WHAT THE ISSUES ARE WITH SCALE.
WHEN YOU START SEEING WHAT THE SIZE OF THOSE WINDOWS ARE AND UNDERSTANDING, UH, THE PROPORTIONAL, UM, INCONGRUITY THAT THIS PROJECT HAS, UH, WITH THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE, UH, I, APART FROM, UH, GIVING, YOU KNOW, MY ACCEPTANCE ON THIS PROJECT.
SO I, I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES THAT CAN BE, UH, YOU KNOW, PROPERLY ADDRESSED IN A, IN STIPULATIONS AND A MOTION, AND MR. CHAIR THAT, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, I MEAN, I, I, I, I, YOU KNOW, LIKE MANY OF Y'ALL, I BEEN SPENT OUR WHOLE LIVES IN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ARCHITECTURE, RIGHT? THERE'S A FAMOUS, UM, CONVERSATION BETWEEN LUIS BARRAGAN AND FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT, AND, AND THE FAMOUS PART OF THE CONVERSATION IS LUIS BARRAGAN TELLS FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT, YOU KNOW, I'VE NEVER HAD THE COURAGE TO USE ONE OF THOSE SLOPED ROOFS.
I, I, I FEEL THAT WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME TREATING NEW CONSTRUCTION, LIKE EXISTING HISTORIC STOCK.
AND YOU KNOW, AT THE, AT THE, FROM, FROM THE, FROM THE TECHNOLOGY, THE ADVANCEMENTS IN TECHNOLOGY TO THE LIVING MACHINE.
SO IT IS TRUE THAT WHEN THEY DIDN'T HAVE H V A C, THE MACHINE TO LIVE IN REQUIRED THAT THE UPPER SECTION OF THE WINDOW CAME DOWN SO THAT THE HOT AIR COULD GO OUT THE, THIS IS A NEW MACHINE, AND IT, AND IT
[01:10:01]
ASKS TO BE CONSIDERED AS A NEW MACHINE, YOU KNOW, UH, IN THE FOUNTAIN HEAD, YOU KNOW, THERE, THE, THE CONVERSATION OF WELL JUST STICK A COLUMN ON IT, AND THEN WE'VE GOT A PROJECT, AND THE WHOLE DISCUSSION IS BASED ON INDIVIDUAL EXPRESSION AND THE, AND, AND THE RIGHT TO EXIST FOR ITSELF.UM, BUT, BUT I THINK THE, THE MOST IMPORTANT PIECE IS WHAT THE APPLICANT JUST DID IN THE LINE OF BEGGING TO JUST BE ACCEPTED.
AND, AND IF YOU WON'T ACCEPT ME AS I AM, AND WHAT CAN I DO TO MAKE YOU ACCEPT ME? THAT, THAT WHOLE PIECE, I THINK IS UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE IT HAPPENS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN TO MANY, MANY APPLICANTS.
AND, AND I THINK THAT IF A PERSON WAS TAKING A HOUSE THAT WAS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THEY WERE DOING THAT WHEN THEY GOT THERE.
A PERSON IS BUILDING NEW IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, I THINK THAT, THAT THEIR TOLERANCE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST YET.
AND CLEARLY IT'S NOT MEANT TO COPY SOMETHING THAT EXISTS.
SO WHILE I, I KNOW THAT YOU CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION LIKE THIS FOR A LONG, LONG TIME, FUNDAMENTALLY, UM, WITH, WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION, I, I, I REALLY DO THINK IT'S A CONVERSATION THAT'S WORTH HAVING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, EVEN IN THE PUBLIC, UH, SECTOR, UH, PUBLICLY, SO THAT, UH, PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE COMING FROM.
AND, AND, AND AGAIN, I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT OR WRONG, OR, OR, OR YOU, OR ME, I THINK IT'S JUST AT LEAST WILLING TO, UM, UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, THESE APPLICANTS WILL, WILL, WILL DO WHATEVER WE TELL 'EM TO DO BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO.
I THINK THAT'S THE WRONG REASON, PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY PRESENT.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I, I'D LIKE TO JUST MAKE AN OBJECTION TO THAT BECAUSE I THINK, UH, THE COMMISSIONER ISN'T APPRECIATING THE POSITION OF SEVERAL PEOPLE ON THE, ON THE COMMISSION HERE.
WE'RE NOT ADVOCATING A FALSE HISTORICISM.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR HER TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS, UH, INCONSISTENT WITH HER, UH, DESIGN IN HER, HER, UH, VOICES AS AN ARTIST.
WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR SOMETHING THAT'S PROPORTIONATELY, YOU KNOW, UH, APPROPRIATE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD HERE.
SO I, I THINK, UH, THAT IS IN KEEPING WITH A GOOD HISTORIC, UH, PRESERVATION, UH, PHILOSOPHY THAT YOU CAN DO AUTHENTIC DESIGN THAT IS OF ITS TIME AND PLACE, BUT IT, PART OF THE PLACE HERE IS AN HISTORIC DISTRICT AND, UH, THAT HAS TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED.
AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR HER TO DO SO HISTORY.
THAT IS NOT WHAT MY OPPOSITION IS TO THIS PROJECT.
I DO NOT THINK SHE HAS NAILED THE PROPORTIONS OF THIS.
I DO NOT THINK SHE'S GOTTEN THE SCALE CORRECT.
SO THAT IS MY OBJECTION TO THIS PROJECT, NOT THAT I'M TRYING TO HAVE HER COME BACK WITH A FAKE BUNGALOW.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER GIBBS AND, UM, I'D LIKE TO ECHO PARTS OF WHAT, UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER SAID.
I THINK AS A COMMISSIONER, WE'RE, WE'RE HERE, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM BUILDING.
I MEAN, WE WANT, WE WANT NEW DEVELOPMENT, WE WANT THINGS TO HAPPEN, BUT THE FACT IS WE'RE IN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD AND FACT THAT THIS IS NOT A HISTORIC HOME THAT IS BEING BUILT IN A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S JUST SIMPLE GUIDELINES THAT NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED.
AND I THINK THAT ONCE THOSE THINGS ARE MET THEN, OR SOME TYPE OF COMPROMISE TO THE POINT WHERE THE COMMISSION AS A WHOLE CAN, I MEAN, A VOTE CAN GET PASSED, THEN THINGS MOVE FORWARD.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK IT'S NO WILL TOWARDS THE APPLICANT OR ANY APPLICANT THAT COMES UP TO US HERE IS JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE GUIDELINES THAT WE'RE JUST, WE'RE ALL HERE TO PROVIDE OUR OPINIONS AND, UM, BASED ON FACT OF WHAT THE GUIDELINES SAY IN ORDER TO HELP MOVE THINGS FORWARD.
I, I, I WOULD AGREE AND, AND I WOULD, UH, AGREE THAT THE, UH, THE DESIGN ISN'T JUST GETTING VOTED DOWN HERE.
IT ALSO GOES THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, AND THERE'S A REASON WHY IT DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH THAT AS WELL.
AND SO I THINK WE'RE ALL WORKING TOGETHER TO TRY TO MAKE THIS A BETTER PROJECT.
AND IT LOOKS LIKE, BASED ON THE COMMENTS WE'VE HEARD HERE TODAY, UM, AND THE, THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED THAT THIS THING NEEDS TO GO TO A D R C, SO UN UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE APPLICANT, I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO, UH, UH, I,
[01:15:01]
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, SEND THIS TO A D R C ONE MORE TIME TO TRY TO GET THIS, UH, WORKED OUT AND THAT WE, UH, STRESS TO ALL OF THE, UM, COMMISSIONERS WHO HAVE OPPOSITION TO THE CURRENT DESIGN TO TRY TO BE THERE SO THAT WE CAN REALLY NAIL DOWN SOME OF OUR CONCERNS FOR THE APPLICANT AND MAKE THIS THIS PROBLEM GO AWAY FOR HER.UM, SO, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S MY MOTION.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO SEND THIS TO D R C.
IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE, UH, SPECIFIC COMMENTS, UH, FOR THE D R C BUT CANNOT, UH, ATTEND, UH, I WOULD, UM, SUGGEST THAT YOU EMAIL THE, THE, YOUR COMMENTS TO STAFF SO THAT THEY CAN BE, UH, UH, REVIEWED AT THE D R C.
SO, UM, AND WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
[20-4531 Address/Description: 251 FURR DR HDRC Case No.: 2020-331 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: LEO G & SANDRA L GIBSON Request: Removal of planting strip and installation of flagstone City Council Dist.: 7]
OKAY, STEPHANIE, ARE YOU READY WITH ITEM 17? I AM.UM, H C R C OR ITEM NUMBER 17 HT R C CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 3 31 ADDRESS, 2 51 FIRM.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO REMOVE THE TURF GRASS IN THE PLANTING STRIP AND INSTALLED FLAGSTONE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDING D A PLAN THAT INCORPORATES AT LEAST 50% GREENERY AND PREVIOUS COVER IN THE PLANTING STRIP IS ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
IF H C R C APPROVES THE REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION APPLY.
UM, AND THAT'S OUR STANDARD STIPULATION FOR ARCHEOLOGY.
UM, I HAVE THE APPLICANT AND HOMEOWNER LEO ON THE LINE.
LEO, CAN YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF? UH, GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS, UH, LEO GALEN GIBSON.
AND LEO, CAN YOU SHARE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY YOU SUBMITTED THE REQUEST TO REMOVE THE GRASS AND INSTALL FLAGSTONE? YES, UH, I WAS PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH THE CURRENT SITUATION.
I, UH, THE AREA BETWEEN MY SIDEWALK AND THE CURB AND THE, AND THE ROAD WAS, UH, I HAD A SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSTALLED, AND, UH, AND I HAVE, UH, FOUR LARGE SEGO PALMS ACROSS THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE.
AND IN THE, IN THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM PROVIDED, UH, THOSE SEGO PALMS WITH WATER AND ALSO THE GRASS.
SINCE THEN, THE CITY HAS, UH, WONDERFULLY DECIDED TO, UH, REPAVE MY STREET.
AND CONSEQUENTLY, ALL THE CURVES AND SIDEWALKS HAVE BEEN PULLED UP, AND ALL THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN THE AREA HAS BEEN COMPLETELY DESTROYED.
AND SO I RE LOOKED AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ACROSS THE STREET IN THE 200 BLOCK OF FUR IS ANOTHER HOUSE THAT HAS A SIMILAR DESIGN OF FLAGSTONE.
AND SO I RE THAT'S WHY I REQUESTED FLAGSTONE.
I PERSONALLY THINK IT'S PROBABLY THE MOST EXPENSIVE, IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, TO, TO LAY FLAGSTONE IN THAT AREA.
SO, UH, BUT I, I'M CERTAINLY, UH, AVAILABLE FOR ANY KIND OF A ALTERNATE SOLUTION.
ONE SOLUTION I, I DO NOT AGREE WITH IS, IS TO GRAVEL IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BECAUSE ALL THAT DOES IS FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT EVERY CAT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS GOT TO URINATE, WHERE YOU HAVE GRAVEL.
AND SO THERE'S, THERE'S A HOUSE ON MARY LEE'S IN THE 200 BLOCK, UH, RIGHT, ALMOST RIGHT DIRECTLY BEHIND MY HOUSE THAT YOU CAN'T HARDLY WALK PAST THE SIDEWALK BECAUSE THE SMELL OF URINE IS, IS SO BAD.
IT WAS PERFECTLY FINE UNTIL THE CITY DECIDED TO DESTROY IT.
UM, ARE THEY STILL WORKING OUT IN YOUR, UH, IN FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE? YEAH, THEY'RE GOING TO BE FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS.
UH, HAVE YOU TALKED TO THEM ABOUT REPAIRING YOUR SPRINKLER SYSTEM AS PART OF THEIR WORK? YES, THEY HAVE TOLD ME THEY
[01:20:01]
DO NOT THAT IT, THAT SIX FEET BELONGS TO THE CITY, 16 IN FROM THE ROAD BELONGED TO THE CITY.AND SO ANY DAMAGE THEY DO, THAT'S TOO BAD.
UH, MISS, I'M, I'M GONNA A LITTLE BIT DEFER TO THAT.
UM, I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND LIVE ON A STREET THAT RECENTLY ALSO WENT THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS.
I HAD SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND THE CITY WENT IN AND REPLACED MY SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
SO WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THE CITY, THE PROCESS IS IF YOU HAD AN EXISTING SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND THEY GO IN AND HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, DO ADJUSTMENTS BECAUSE THEY BREAK IN THE, THE CONCRETE, AND OF COURSE, YES.
I MEAN, THERE'S NO WAY OF SAVING YOUR SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
THEY GO IN AND REPLACE IT WHERE IT WAS EXISTING.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA PUT IN A NEW SYSTEM.
I MEAN, A NEW WITH WAS NO SYSTEM, BUT IF YOU HAD A SPRINKLER SYSTEM, THEY ARE REPLACING YOUR SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
I, I'M, YOU KNOW, THE FLAGSTONE IS A VERY EXPENSIVE, I MEAN, IF I CAN GET SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, GET THE CITY TO AGREE THAT THEY WILL REPLACE WHAT WAS THERE WITH THE NEWS, BECAUSE IT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE ALL NEW BECAUSE IN ADDITION TO, UH, THEY'VE, UH, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THEY EXPLAIN IT, BUT, UH, THEY PUT A A T AND SO THEY PUT ANOTHER PIECE OF CONCRETE THAT GOES, UH, THAT, THAT, UH, GOES PARALLEL TO VOL STREET AND THAT THAT T WAS NOT THERE BEFORE.
AND THERE IS NOT AN ADDITIONAL SIDEWALK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF, OF VOL GOING DOWN VOL TOWARD, UH, YOU KNOW, DONALDSON.
SO I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY PUT THAT T THERE, BUT SO I MEAN, IT WILL, IT WILL BE A LOT OF MONEY TO TO, TO DIG IT ALL BACK UP AND PUT NEW PIPES IN IT.
UH, THE FLAGSTONE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE COMMONLY SEE EITHER ON THIS STREET OR THIS BLOCK, SO IT WOULD LIKE LOOK A LITTLE BIT OFF.
UM, IS THERE A REASON WHY, BUT THERE IS ONE IN THE 200 BLOCK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET AND THAT IT'S BEEN DONE IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS? CAN WE MAYBE, UM, IF YOU, I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING TO DO WITH T D I, I MEAN, IT'S, AND I AM, UH, I MEAN, AS FAR AS I CAN SEE ALSO WHAT HAS HAPPENED ON LAKE, AND THE OTHER BLOCK OF HER THAT'S ALREADY DONE IS THAT THEY ARE REPLACING THE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS WHERE THERE WAS A CURRENT, UH, WHERE THERE WAS A SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
AND I DO BELIEVE, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY CAN FIND OUT WHAT THE RULES ARE WITH THAT STAFF OR ANYBODY.
WE CAN CERTAINLY GET AN ANSWER.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN ANSWER THAT RIGHT NOW.
SO MAYBE THE APPLICANT WOULD BE WILLING TO POSTPONE THE CASE THE NEXT MEETING, AND STAFF CAN HELP US GET AN ANSWER ON THAT SINCE THAT WOULD BE THE, UM, ALMOST BE, YOU KNOW, THE BEST SOLUTION.
DID, UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
I, I HAVE ONE MORE LITTLE PIECE TO, TO, TO HOW, HOW MAYBE TO PROCEED HERE.
UM, WE SEE, WE SEE THIS KIND OF, UH, REQUEST FROM TIME TO TIME, AND GENERALLY IT IS NOT A WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF THE LAWN BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE STREET, UH, HAS HISTORICALLY NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION.
THE GUIDELINES ARE PRETTY CLEAR ABOUT 50% OF THE GREENERY, UH, SHOULD BE GREEN IMPERVIOUS THERE.
I KNOW THERE'S SOME EROTIC OPTIONS, AND IT'S AVAILABLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
SO IF YOUR PROPOSAL ACTUALLY MEETS THE GUIDELINES OF 50%, UM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS COMMISSION.
UM, THAT'S, THAT'S WHETHER OR NOT THE SPRINKLER ISSUE GETS RESOLVED.
UM, I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN TAKE ON THE SPRINKLER ISSUE TODAY.
I WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT A MOTION TO CONTINUE.
UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S NECESSARY AND MAYBE COMMISSIONER GRU CAN ADDRESS THAT THOUGHT.
UM, WHILE COMMISSIONER GRU IS PONDERING THAT, I, I JUST HAVE A QUICK COMMENT.
I THINK, UM, THAT GREEN STRIP IN THE, IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IS A PRETTY PREVALENT FEATURE ON VIRTUALLY EVERY STREET IN THIS DISTRICT.
AND WHILE THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW PEOPLE THAT HAVE PUT IN THE FLAGSTONES, AND BY THE WAY, THE FLAGSTONES ARE BEAUTIFUL, THE APPLICANT IS RIGHT, IT'S AN EXPENSIVE OPTION.
UM, BUT I THINK IT'S KIND OF INCONSISTENT WITH THE PREVAILING PATTERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF, OF THE SIDEWALKS BEING BORDERED, UH, OR SEPARATED FROM THE CURB WITH, WITH THE GREENSCAPE.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, HISTORICALLY THEY HAD THE PALM TREES
[01:25:01]
AND, UH, OTHER PLANTINGS IN, IN THOSE, UH, THAT SOME STILL SURVIVE, OTHERS HAVE AGED OUT AND, AND DIED AND GONE AWAY.UM, SO I, I WOULD BE RELUCTANT JUST FROM THE PREVAILING PATTERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO SUPPORT THIS, UH, NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT A BEAUTIFUL MATERIAL, NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT A A, AN EXPENSIVE MATERIAL, BUT JUST BECAUSE IT'S WOULD BE KIND OF A, AN OUTLIER WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, UH, THE FLAGSTONE IS, IS IT IS GOING TO BE EXPENSIVE.
I KNOW BECAUSE I I I, I'VE HAD SOME DONE IN THE BACK OF MY HOUSE, SO I MEAN, I, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS A PERFECT, PERFECT SOLUTION, BUT I, I DON'T WANT TO MULCH OR, UH, GRAVEL.
UH, AND SO, AND WHEN YOU TEAR THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM UP AND IT HAS NO SPRINKLER SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, THE SEGO PALMS WILL LIVE WITHOUT A SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
YOU KNOW, NOTHING ELSE IS GOING TO LIVE IN TEXAS WITHOUT A SPRINKLER SYSTEM OR NOT VERY MANY THINGS ARE GONNA LIVE, YOU KNOW, AND PROSPER IN THAT, IN THAT, IN THAT AREA WITHOUT A, WITHOUT WATER.
LET ME, LET ME TRY SOMETHING ELSE.
UM, THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE BLACKSTONE IS, IS PROBABLY NOT, I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE NOBODY ON THE COMMISSION WILL, WILL, WILL SUPPORT THAT AND, AND KIND OF AGREE, UM, UNLESS YOU DON'T WANNA, YOU KNOW, TABLE THIS AND CONTINUE THIS AND TRY TO SEE IF YOU CAN GET AN ANSWER FROM, UM, FROM T D I, UM, YOU MENTIONED ABOUT A PROPERTY DOWN THE STREET THAT HAD BLACKSTONES.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN PULL UP GOOGLE, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A COMPLETE FLAGSTONE.
I THINK THERE'S SOME LANDSCAPING AND THERE'S SOME, LIKE, SO MAYBE WE CAN SEE LIKE AN OPTION WHERE WE DO HALF LANDSCAPING, MAYBE SOME HARDSCAPE.
SO THAT IS NOT BLACKSTONE, YOU KNOW, COMPLETE BLACKSTONE, AND THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WE COULD, WE COULD LOOK AT, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S ASKED TODAY, RIGHT? WE WOULD HAVE TO SEE A NEW APPLICATION WITH A THOUGHT OUT DESIGN LIKE THIS HAS, WHICH HAS A MIX OF EVERYTHING INCORPORATING A FEW BLACKSTONES.
I GOT A QUESTION FOR, UH, GO AHEAD, SIR.
WELL, MY QUESTION FOR HI CORY, IS THE, THE, THE CONDITION THAT IS SHOWN IN THE, I IN THE IMAGE FRONT OF THE, OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WHERE THE CURBS TORN UP, IS THAT CURRENT? CORRECT.
SO, SO RIGHT NOW THERE'S, THAT'S CURRENT.
THERE'S NO CURB RIGHT NOW? NO.
WELL, WELL, THEY, THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE BUILT A NEW CURB AROUND THE VERY CORNER OF VOL GOING AROUND TO FUR, AND, UH, BUT THEY HAVEN'T FINISHED THE SIDEWALK OR, YOU KNOW, THE, ALL THE SIDEWALKS STILL HAVE TO BE PULLED UP AND, UH, AND, AND NONE OF THE CURB ALONG FUR DRIVE HAS BEEN DONE.
SO ALL THAT'S IS YET TO BE DONE.
SO I, I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE HERE FOR ANOTHER TWO OR THREE MONTHS.
UH, I WOULD SUGGEST, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIMING OF THE APPLICATION IS IN, IN ANY OTHER PROCESSES, BUT I WOULD WAIT TILL IT'S COMPLETE AND THEN, AND THEN, UM, COME BACK.
I DON'T KNOW, UH, COREY, IF AN APPLICATION CAN BE PUT ON HOLD AND THEN, AND THEN WOKEN UP AT A PARTICULAR TIME, BUT IT, IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE, WELL, THE GRAPHS WILL BE DEAD.
WHAT, WHAT'S OUT, WHAT'S OUT THERE NOW IS IN THE MIDDLE OF DYING.
BUT THE SEGO PALMS, I SAID WILL BE FINE, BUT THE GRASS IS GONNA DIE.
BUT, BUT JUST IN THE, IN THE INTEREST OF YOUR, OF THE SOIL RETENTION AND WHATEVER YOU WERE GONNA DO, WOULDN'T, THIS WOULD NOT BE THE TIME TO DO IT BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GONNA BE LOOKING FOR A STURDY PLATFORM FOR WHATEVER OCCURS, RIGHT? IT JUST SEEMS THAT YOU'RE IN KIND OF A, IN A LIMBO, UH, WHILE THE CITY COMPLETES WHAT IT'S DOING, BECAUSE WHEN THEY'RE DONE, UH, AND PARTICULARLY ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT COMMISSIONER GROUP WAS SAYING, IF THEY COME IN AND THEY, THEY RE SPRINKLER IT, YOU MAY LIKE IT AFTERWARDS, BUT, BUT IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM THAT, THAT, THAT IT'S IN A COMPLETE FORM TO PRESENT OR PROPOSE SOMETHING.
PROBABLY MAKE MORE SENSE TO WAIT, LET THE GRASS DIE, ALL OF THAT.
THAT'S, THAT'S INEVITABLE, RIGHT? UH, AND WHEN THOSE CURBS AND ALL THAT IS DONE, THEN TURNING OVER THE SOIL, BRINGING IN NEW SOIL, OR SEEING WHAT THE OUTCOME OF THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM IS, AND POSSIBLY PUTTING NEW GRASS, YOU MAY FIND YOURSELF IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT? I LIKE IT THE WAY THAT IT'S, ONCE THEY'RE FINISHED WITH THE NEW CURBING, THAT, THAT I'M EXPECTING WILL BE QUITE A RETENTION, UH, TASK FOR THAT, FOR THE, FOR THE ELEVATION THAT YOU HAVE THERE IN THE FRONT.
[01:30:01]
I WOULD THINK THATIF THEY, IF, IF, IF I LET THE GRASS DIE AND, AND WHICH IT WILL BE, AND THEN THEY, NOW THE CITY'S GOTTA COME IN AND PUT SOD UP ON TOP AND, BUT THAT STILL DOESN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM UNLESS THEY REPAIR THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
WELL, IT SOUNDS IF IF NOBODY'S WILLING TO SIGN UP TO REPAIR THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, THEN YOU KNOW THAT I DON'T WANT GRASS OR ANY KIND OF THING OUT THERE THAT'S GONNA DIE.
WELL, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER AGAIN, UM, BASED ON WHAT COMMISSIONER GRU HAS SAID, THAT THE CITY HAS REPLACED EXISTING SPRINKLER LINES WHERE THEY'VE, UH, DONE NEW CURBS AND SIDEWALKS IN THAT, UH, I WOULD ASK THAT, UH, ONE SUGGESTION IS TO, UH, WE COULD POSTPONE THE, WE COULD CALL FOR A, UH, POSTPONEMENT, OR YOU COULD, UH, MR. GIBSON, YOU COULD, UH, PULL THE APPLICATION FOR NOW, AND I WOULD ASK THAT YOU WORK WITH, UH, O H P STAFF, THEY CAN GET YOU IN TOUCH WITH THE PROPER PERSON AT THE, UH, CITY DEPARTMENT THAT IS IN CHARGE OF THIS PROJECT, AND HOPEFULLY, UH, RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF THE SPRINKLER REPLACEMENT.
UM, BASED ON WHAT A COMMISSIONER GRU HAS SAID THAT HAS HAPPENED ELSEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, I, YOU KNOW, I, I'M, I'M IN TOTAL AGREEMENT WITH THAT.
BUT, BUT, BUT THE, THE PROBLEM ARISES IS THAT IF THEY CAN'T, IF, IF THEY CAN'T SPRINKLER, I MEAN, IF THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE WILLING TO FIX THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, THEN WE'RE RIGHT BACK TO WHERE WE STARTED FROM.
AND, AND THIS IS COMMISSIONER.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S, UH, COMMENT THERE.
YOU KNOW, I, AS FAR AS CONTINUING THE CASE, UH, THE OUTCOME OF THE SPRINKLER IS IRRELEVANT.
I THINK REALLY FOR THE DISCUSSION, UH, HERE, I, I THINK THE, THE, UH, TO THE APPLICANT, I, I DON'T THINK THAT YOU HAVE SUPPORT, UH, TO DO WHOLESALE, UH, FLAGSTONE ACROSS THE, THE FRONT.
UM, AND WELL, IT, THERE HAS TO BE FOUR HOLES.
'CAUSE I HAVE FOUR VERY LARGE SEGO PALMS THAT, THAT HAVE, THAT ARE PROBABLY, UH, EIGHT FEET ACROSS, YOU KNOW, OR WING SPAN.
THEY PROBABLY HAVE, YOU KNOW, 16.
SO THE NUMBER WE'RE LOOKING AT IS 50% COVERAGE OR LESS.
SO THAT, THAT, THAT PUTS US IN A POSITION WHERE, UM, WHERE YOU, WE CAN'T REALLY TAKE ACTION ON THE TAKE ACTION, BUT IT, IT'S LIKELY GONNA BE A DENIAL AND CA REALLY RIGHT.
KICKING IT DOWN THE ROAD DOESN'T REALLY SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
SO WE MAYBE, MAYBE WE SHOULD TAKE UP YOUR APPLICATION AND, UH, LEAVE YOU WITH AN OUTCOME.
YOU CAN CERTAINLY COME BACK WITH A MODIFIED SCHEME.
WELL, AND COMMISSIONERS, I WAS ALSO GOING TO ADD, UM, WE SAW A STREET VIEW OF A, ANOTHER PARKWAY SPACE THAT WAS NOT FULLY HARDSCAPED AND, BUT JUST HAD ZURICH PLANTS THAT'S ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
THE ONLY REASON IT'S COMING TO THE COMMISSION NOW IS BECAUSE IT'S A FULL HARDSCAPE REPLACEMENT.
SO ONE SUGGESTION IS THAT, UM, WE TAKE ACTION ON THIS CASE.
UM, ANOTHER OPTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT TO PULL HIS APPLICATION, WAIT AND SEE HOW THE, UH, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS ARE CONSTRUCTED.
UM, AND IN THE MEANTIME WORK WITH O H P STAFF TO FIGURE OUT, UH, WITH THE CITY WHETHER THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM WILL BE REPAIRED.
THEN THE APPLICANT COULD COME BACK WITH, UH, A PROPOSAL, UM, WITH A MODIFIED, UH, WORKING WITH STAFF, AGAIN WITH A PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE AND DIFFERENT MATERIALS.
UH, I, I, I THINK I COULD, I COULD AGREE TO THAT BECAUSE IF, UH, LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF COVER THAT'S NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, A SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND GRASS, IT'S GONNA BE EXPENSIVE.
SO I'M NOT REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO, TO DOING SOMETHING THAT THAT'S GONNA COST ME MONEY.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I HAD A PERFECTLY IRRIGATED, YOU KNOW, IRRIGATION, YOU KNOW, AND IT WAS JUST PERFECT AND IT WAS NICE AND GREEN AND IT WORKED FINE, BUT NOW THAT WITHOUT THE, THE CITY TEARING UP THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, SO IF, IF SOMEBODY FROM THE STAFF WOULD GET AHOLD OF ME AND, AND, UH, AND GET BACK TO ME WITH A PERSON THAT, THAT THAT'S IN THIS
[01:35:01]
CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS THAT'S IN CHARGE OF THIS, THAT, THAT WILL ANSWER THE, THE QUESTION ABOUT WILL THEY, UH, REPAIR THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM THEN? BUT, UH, I MEAN, IF THEY DON'T REPAIR THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM THAT I, THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEN WE'RE RIGHT BACK TO WHERE WE STARTED FROM.WELL, MR. GIBSON, ARE YOU WILLING TO, UH, PULL YOUR APPLICATION UNTIL YOU HEAR BACK FROM STAFF? MOST ASSUREDLY.
STAFF WILL GET WITH YOU, UH, AND HOPEFULLY GET TO A, UH, A SOLUTION FOR YOUR, UH, ISSUE HERE.
[20-4543 Address/Description: 333 W CEVALLOS HDRC Case No.: 2020-336 RIO District: RIO-7 Applicant: David Abrego/Signs Up Request: Temporary signage City Council Dist.: 1]
EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE? AGENDA ITEM? YES, GO AHEAD.AGENDA ITEM NUMBER, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 18 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 23 36 3 33 WEST OF IOS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL A TEMPORARY REAL ESTATE SIGN AT 3 33 WEST VALS FOR 90 TO 120 DAYS.
THE PROPOSED SIGN WILL FEATURE AN OVERALL SIZE OF 192 SQUARE FEET TO BE VISIBLE FROM INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 10.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN RIO SEVEN.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL, EXCUSE ME.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A AND B WITH THE STIPULATION THAT NO MORE THAN ONE SIGN BE INSTALLED NOT LARGER THAN 32 SQUARE FEET.
THE SIGN SHALL BE REMOVED 120 DAYS FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
NOW HAVE MR. DAVID ABREGO FROM, FROM SIGNS UP ON THE LINE.
UM, THE REASON I'M BRINGING THIS CASE BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY, TYPICALLY AS A SIGN INSTALLER, I TRY TO ADHERE TO ALL THE RULES WITHIN THE CITY.
UM, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, UH, A 32 SQUARE FOOT SIGN, IT IS A FOUR BY EIGHT NOMINALLY, BUT IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM THE AREA THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ADVERTISE TO.
SO WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO IS SEE IF WE CAN GET SOMETHING LARGER.
THE INITIAL REQUEST WAS FOR 192 SQUARE FEET.
THAT WAS 12 FEET TALL BY 16 FEET WIDE.
UM, NORMAL REAL ESTATE SIGNS, IT'S, THEY'RE BIG ON THE BIGGER SIDE.
THEY'RE MAY BE EIGHT FEET TALL BY 12 FEET WIDE.
96 SQUARE FEET I THINK WOULD DO THE JOB.
UM, WELL, UH, 64 SQUARE FEET, PROBABLY NOT SO WELL, BUT I DON'T THINK 32 SQUARE FEET IS, IS EVEN WORTH PUTTING A SIGN OUT THERE.
UH, ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE RULES, I GUESS.
SO, I'M HERE REQUESTING SPECIAL PERMISSION FOR A TEMPORARY PERMISSION FOR A TEMPORARY SIGN, UH, FOR VAL STREET.
UM, MY THOUGHTS ARE, I, I AGREE.
I I'M FAMILIAR WITH, UH, THE PROJECT IN THE AREA, AND, UM, I DON'T THINK A LARGER, UH, A LARGER SIGN THAN HAS BEEN STIPULATED BY STAFF IS, IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM.
BUT 192 FEET, IT'S TOO LARGE FOR ME.
I THINK I HEARD THE APPLICANT MENTION THAT A 96 SQUARE FOOT SIGN, UH, WOULD BE THE SMALLEST SIGN THAT, UH, WOULD HAVE SOME EFFECT, AND I WOULD SUPPORT A 96 SQUARE FOOT TEMPORARY SIGN, UH, THAT SHALL BE REMOVED WITHIN 120 DAYS.
YOU HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE, FERNANDEZ? AYE.
[20-4563 Address/Description: 277 W WILDWOOD HDRC Case No.: 2020-326 Historic District Name: Olmos Park Terrace Applicant: GONZALEZ ANGELIQUE Request: Roof replacement from composition shingle to standing steam metal City Council Dist.: 1]
NEXT IS ITEM 19.UM, RACHEL, ARE YOU THERE? I AM.
AGENDA ITEM 19, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 3 26 2 77 WEST WILDWOOD.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE EXISTING COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF WITH A NEW METAL ROOF ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDING.
E STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT AN IN-KIND REPLACEMENT, UM, OF COMPOSITION SHINGLES BE INSTALLED.
IF THE H C R C FINDS THE METAL REPLACEMENT ROOF APPROPRIATE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLS A STANDING SCENE, METAL ROOF FEATURING STAFF STANDARD, UH, STANDING SCENE METAL ROOF
[01:40:01]
STIPULATIONS.AND I HAVE THE APPLICANT ANGELIQUE ON THE LINE.
ANGELIQUE, ARE YOU THERE? HELLO? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
HELLO, THIS IS ANGELIQUE GONZALEZ.
IT'S NICE TO BE MEETING WITH YOU TODAY.
WE CAN, WE CAN HEAR YOU WALK US, WALK US THROUGH YOUR REQUEST.
UM, I'M REQUESTING TO REPLACE MY, UH, SHINGLE ROOF, THE METAL ROOF.
UM, I, THIS, I'M AN HEIR OF THE FAMILY THAT, UH, HAS LIVED THERE FOR THE PAST PROBABLY 60 YEARS.
AND, UM, IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, THE ROOF HAS, UM, HAD SOME PRETTY BIG LEAKS IN IT.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF ANY PICTURES FROM THE CURRENT ROOF HAVE, UH, BEEN BASED ON THE FILE, BUT, UM, I KNOW THAT, UM, I WOULD LIKE A METAL ROOF FOR SAFETY REASONS.
AND, UM, I KNOW THAT THEY LAST A LONG TIME.
I'D LIKE IT TO LAST MY LIFETIME AND FOR THE REST OF MY FAMILY TO BE ABLE TO ENJOY EVEN AFTER I'M GONE.
I KNOW THEY'RE VERY DURABLE, THEY'RE ENERGY, UH, EFFICIENT.
I KNOW THAT, UM, THEY WILL HELP WITH INSULATION.
RIGHT NOW IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO KEEP THE HOUSE COOL.
AND IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU'LL SEE SEVERAL OTHER HOUSES IN ALMO PARK TERRACE.
THERE ARE OVER 25 HOMES, AND IF YOU LOOK AROUND, YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY ALSO, UH, SPORT METAL ROOF, INCLUDING RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AGAIN.
UM, I'VE, I'VE NOTICED THAT, UH, STAFF HAS, HAS POINTED OUT, UH, THAT VIA THE SANBORNS THAT, UH, SHINGLE ROOFS, UH, WERE PREDOMINANT, WERE PREDOMINANT AND MOST COMMON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS, UH, THEY'RE MAKING THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR REPLACEMENT IN KIND.
AND THE OTHER IS THAT, UM, THERE'S EVIDENCE THAT THIS HAS HAD A SHINGLE ROOF, UM, ALL ALONG.
AND FROM TIME TO TIME, UH, ROOF MATERIAL CHANGES, UM, I THINK THEY HAVE A LOT TO DO WITH THE CONTEXT.
UH, CAN STAFF ANSWER, ANSWER THIS FOR ME REAL QUICK ON THIS BLOCK? HOW MANY OF THE STRUCTURES HAVE METAL ROOFS? I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
THERE ARE THREE OTHER HOUSES INCLUDING THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR ON THE BLOCK OF WEST WILDWOOD.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S TAKE IS ON THIS, BUT GIVEN THE CON I SEE THAT THE METAL ROOF NEXT DOOR, THERE'S A METAL ROOF AND I, AND I SEE IT'S KIND OF THE SAME STYLE.
UM, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN VERY CONSISTENT WITH THIS KIND OF REQUEST.
AND IT MAY HAVE HAD THAT HOUSE NEXT DOOR, MAY HAVE HAD A, A METAL ROOF AT SOME POINT.
I FEEL LIKE THAT WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN VERY CONSISTENT ABOUT, UM, FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINES ON THIS ONE, AT WHICH MEANS THAT IF THERE STORY WASN'T A METAL ROOF ON, THEN WE KIND OF JUST GO WITH WHAT, YOU KNOW, REPLACEMENT IN KIND.
WELL, PARTICULARLY IN METAL ROOFS THAT WE SEE IN KING WILLIAM AND METAL ROOF REQUESTS, UH, IN KING WILLIAM LAVACCA AND RIVER ROAD, THEY KINDA STAND OUT MOST, IN MY MIND, THE, THE STYLING CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE CONTRIBUTE A LOT TO THE DETERMINATION.
AND I THINK, UH, ON THE WHOLE, UM, IT'S MOST APPROPRIATE TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL IN KIND, I THINK THE LOWER PROFILE AND THE CONFIGURATION OF THE MATH HERE, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
UM, UM, I MIGHT BE, I MIGHT BE ALONE.
ARE ARE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER THOUGHTS FROM THE COMMISSION? UM, I, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, JUST WITH THE, THE PARTICULAR STYLE OF THIS, UH, HOUSE AND, AND THE LOW PROFILE.
I WOULD AGREE TO SUPPORT THE METAL ROOF, BUT I ALSO AGREE, UH, WITH COMMISSIONER GROUP THAT WE ARE PRETTY CONSISTENT ABOUT GIVING KIND, UM, COMPONENT.
SO, UH, I WOULD LEAD THIS UP TO MY FELLOW PROP FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.
I THINK I COULD SUPPORT, UH, BOTH OF THOSE CONCEPTS.
UM, JUST DEPENDING UPON WHAT, UH, I, I KNOW THAT IF WE DO SUPPORT THE METAL ROOF, IT WOULD BE, UM, WITH OUR STANDARD STIPULATIONS FOR THE, UH, THE TYPE AND PROFILES.
AND SO I THINK THAT I COULD SUPPORT THAT WITH THE STONE FACADE.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S JUST MY,
[01:45:02]
MY 2 CENTS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ.UM, I THINK THAT, THAT I COULD SUPPORT THE METAL ROOF, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO ONE OF THE PICTURES IN THE REAR SHOWING A PATCHWORK OF ASPHALT SHINGLES.
AND I, AND I WONDER WHETHER THE, THE LOW SLOPE, UM, IS, UH, CONTRIBUTING TO, UH, FAILURES OF THE ROOF, UH, OR IF, IF IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT, THAT THIS ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF NOT HAVING METAL VALLEYS AND OR, OR A COMBINATION RIGHT OF, OF, UH, A HIGHER GRADE ASPHALT SHINGLE, UM, ROOF.
I, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT, UH, THAT A, THAT A DIMENSIONAL STYLED OR A HEAVIER GRADE ASPHALT SHINGLE WOULDN'T TAKE A TAKE AWAY AS MUCH FROM THIS VERY FLAT CLEAN, CLEAN LINE.
BUT IT, IT MAY BE, IT MAY BE BEST FOR THIS HOUSE, UH, THAT IT SEEMS THAT IT'S HAD PROBLEMS WITH, ITS WITH ITS ASPHALT SHINGLES OVER TIME.
I'D LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT IF THERE'S FASCIA WORK THAT'S GONNA GO ALONG WITH THE NEW ROOF.
ARE THEY GONNA WORK ON THE, ON THE WOOD MEMBERS AS WELL? THAT'S FOR THE APPLICANT? NOT AT, NOT AT, NO, NOT AT THIS TIME, SIR.
WELL, I WOULD, I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT THAT, THAT IF, IF A METAL ROOF IS, IS APPROVED AND, AND, AND APPLIED AS, AS, AS, UH, STAFF WILL WILL GUIDE, UM, THAT THAT'S THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THE WOOD ISSUES ON THE FASCIA BOARDS AS WELL.
THE LAST THING YOU WANNA DO IS GO BACK AND DO THAT ONCE YOU PUT A YES SIR.
UH, I BELIEVE STAFF HAS THIS RIGHT THIS TIME AND I WOULD SUPPORT REPLACEMENT OF THE ROOF WITH SHINGLES.
IS THAT A MOTION? COMMISSIONER? NAFO? I THINK COMMISSIONER WAS MUTED, BUT ACTUALLY, YES.
SO TO BE CLEAR, THAT WOULD BE A MOTION FOR DENIAL.
IT CAN ALSO BE A MOTION TO REPLACE, UH, RUTH, BUT IN KIND THERE, THERE'S A, IT'D BE A MOTION FOR DENIAL OF THE METAL ROOF.
THAT THAT IS WHAT IS REQUESTED.
SECOND, MR. CHAIR, JUST MAKE, WANNA MAKE A COMMENT.
THE IMAGE THAT'S, THAT'S PRESENTED, UH, ON THE STAFF'S, UH, PRESENTATION, YOU, YOU KNOW, I WONDER THESE TWO BILL, THESE TWO PIECES OF STRUCTURE, THEY RUN INTO EACH OTHER AND, AND IT APPEARS THAT WHERE THE ROOFING HAS BEEN CHANGED, YOU SEE, IT APPEARS THAT IT PROBABLY HAS BEEN CHANGED OVER AND OVER AND OVER IS BECAUSE THOSE TWO VALLEY, THOSE, THOSE TWO PITCHES, THE DROPS, THEY RUN INTO EACH OTHER IN A WAY THAT THEY SHOULD NEVER RIGHT.
AND I'M WONDERING IF, IF THE, YOU KNOW, THE ASPHALT SHINGLE IS NOT MADE TO HANDLE THOSE KIND OF MISTAKES, RIGHT? THEY'RE NOT REMEDY THAT KIND OF JUNCTION JUST IN TERMS OF THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE.
UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DENIAL.
MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL? PLEASE? PLEASE LEAVE A MESSAGE.
WE'RE GONNA MUTE EVERYONE REAL QUICK.
I'LL MAKE SURE TO UNMUTE YOURSELF WHEN YOU ARE CALLED, RIGHT FERNANDEZ.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS A MOTION FOR DENIAL.
SO AN I IS A MOTION IS IS A VOTE FOR DENIAL.
NAYYY WHAT SIR? NAY LIFO LA I ASSUME THAT WAS AN I IT WAS YOUR MOTION
UM, SO WE'LL NEED ANOTHER MOTION.
SO MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
I, I AGREE WITH, UH, HOW, UH, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN ARTICULATED THIS.
I'M, I'M KIND OF, UH, ON THE FENCE WITH THIS.
I THINK THIS STYLISTICALLY THE LOW PROFILE ROOF, UM, AND
[01:50:01]
WITH THE FEW HOUSES IN THE IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY OF THIS HAVING A METAL ROOF, AS LONG AS THE, UH, APPLICANT, UH, FOLLOWS THE, THE STAFF'S, UH, STANDARD STIPULATIONS FOR THE PROFILING, UH, DETAILING OF THE METAL ROOF, I WOULD, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF IT.SO I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST WITH, UH, STANDARD STAFF STIPULATIONS THAT USUALLY COME WITH THE METAL ROOF REPLACEMENTS.
UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN.
CHAIRMAN FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL.
UM, AS NOTED, UM, HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE.
EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE?
[20-4535 Address/Description: 1112 MUNCEY HDRC Case No.: 2020-315 Historic District Name: Government Hill Applicant: Daniel Long Request: Window replacement, siding replacement, door replacement, exterior modifications, fenestration modifications, driveway installation, painting and rehabilitation City Council Dist.: 2]
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 20 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 23 15 11 12 MONTHS E THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE THE EXISTING WOOD SIDING WITH COMPOSITE BOARD AND BATTEN AND LAP SIDING.TWO, TO REPLACE THE EXISTING EXISTING BALCONY PORCH DECKING AND INSTALL A BALCONY RAILING.
THREE TO RECONSTRUCT THE REAR DECK AND INSTALL A SPIRAL STAIRCASE.
MODIFY THE HISTORIC FENESTRATION PATTERN BY REMOVING ORIGINAL WINDOW OPENINGS.
REPLACE ALL EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
REPLACE ALL EXISTING WOOD DOORS WITH STEEL DOORS.
SEVEN, RECONSTRUCT AN EXTERIOR WATER HEATER CLOSET.
INSTALL A NEW METAL FOUNDATION SKIRTING NINE.
REPLACE THE EXISTING WOOD PORCH COLUMNS.
INSTALL A NEW SOFFIT AND FACIA RESULTING IN THE REMOVAL OF THE ROOF'S.
PAINT THE STORAGE STRUCTURE AND 12, INSTALL A GRAVEL DRIVEWAY TO FEATURE 10 FEET AND WIDTH.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE.
SIDING REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING C.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE EXISTING SIDING BE REPAIRED IN PLACE WHERE SIDING IS MISSING OR DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR.
IT SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH MATCHING WOOD SIDING.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO PORCH DECKING AND RAILING REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING D THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT ONE BY THREE TONGUE AND GROOVE DECKING BE INSTALLED PERPENDICULAR TO THE FRONT FACADE.
AND TWO, THAT NEW PORCH RAILING MATCH THE EXISTING AND PROFILE AND MATERIAL.
THE DETAILED DRAWING IS TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE C O A STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM THREE REAR REPORTS RECONSTRUCTION BASED ON FINDING E WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS THAT ONE BY THREE TONGUE AND GROOVE DECKING BE INSTALLED PERPENDICULAR TO THE REAR FAC SIDE.
AND TWO, A DETAILED THE SPIRAL STAIRCASE MUST BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE C O A STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM FOUR.
FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS BASED ON FINDING F.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT ALL EXISTING WINDOW OPENINGS REMAIN AS THEY CURRENTLY EXIST.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM FIVE.
WOULD WINDOW REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING GENE STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT ALL EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS BE REPAIRED.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM SIX DOOR REPLACEMENT FOR ONLY THE FRONT DOORS ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
AS NOTED IN FINDING H, THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT REPLACEMENT WOOD DOORS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE C L A STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM SEVEN, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE HOT WATER HEATER CLOSET WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE EXISTING FORM BE MAINTAINED AND THAT THE RECONSTRUCTED CLOSET FEATURE SIDING TO MATCH THAT AT THE HISTORIC HOUSE IS NUMBER IN FINDING I EIGHT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT FOUNDATION SKIRTING INSULATION WITH THE STIPULATION THAT WOULD STARTING BE INSTALLED INSTEAD OF THE PROPOSED METAL SKIRTING IS NOTED IN FINDING J THE COMPOSITE MATERIAL MAY, MAY BE USED AT THE GROUND TO PREVENT WOOD ROT.
STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER NINE.
PORTS COLUMN REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING K STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE EXISTING COLUMNS BE REPAIRED IF THE EXISTING COLUMNS ARE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR OR ARE STRUCTURALLY UNSOUND.
THE NEW COLUMNS SHOULD MATCH THE EXISTING WITH THE
[01:55:01]
DETAILED DRAWING BEING SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE C O A STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10.BASED ON FINDING ILL STAFF RECOMMENDS THE HISTORIC FORM OF THE ROOF BE MAINTAINED AS IT EXISTS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 11, PAINTING AND SUBMITTED BASED ON FINDING M.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM 12 DRIVEWAY INSTALLATION WITH THE STIPULATION THAT GRAVEL IS NATURAL, EXCUSE ME, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT GRAVEL THAT IS NATURAL TO SAN ANTONIO IN REGARDS TO ITS SIZE AND COLOR BEING INSTALLED.
A PHOTO OF THE PROPOSED GRAB WAS TO BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A C O A I HAVE THE APPLICANT, MR. DANIEL LONG HERE ON THE PHONE NOW WE'LL NOTE, UH, TO THE COMMISSION THAT HE DID ON FRIDAY.
SUBMIT, UH, UPDATES TO THE APPLICATION PACKAGE THAT ADDRESSED STAFF'S COMMENTS.
UM, SO I BELIEVE HE'LL START WITH THAT.
UM, I GUESS JUST A LITTLE BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE ITSELF.
UH, WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY ENCLOSED ON JUNE 30TH OF THIS YEAR.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE, THE CONDITION OF THE EXISTING HOUSE WAS, UM, KIND OF IN A STATE OF DISREPAIR.
THERE WAS A FIRE IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE THAT HAD DONE SOME SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE.
THE, THE BACK OF THE HOUSE WAS OUT OF SQUARE AND OUT OF PLUM.
AND THE, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY THE ONLY THING THAT WAS SALVAGEABLE LOOKING ON THE HOUSE IN OUR INITIAL VIEW WAS THE ROOF HAD BEEN REPLACED SOMETIME IN THE PAST FIVE TO 10 YEARS.
UM, I GUESS A LONG WAY TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR INITIAL THOUGHT WAS THAT PRESERVING THIS HISTORIC STRUCTURE BUT ALMOST TREATING THIS SKIN AS A NEW BUILD.
UM, WHETHER THAT WAS INCORRECT OR NOT ON OUR PART, BUT, UM, THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE INITIALLY WENT THROUGH AND, AND SET OUT OUR INITIAL, UM, SUBMITTAL TO, TO HT R C.
UM, WE'VE SINCE COME BACK LIKE EDWARD MENTIONED AND, AND COME BACK AND KIND OF TRIED TO ADDRESS ALL THE 12 COMMENTS THAT, THAT WERE INITIALLY THERE.
UM, AND I GUESS WE CAN KIND OF GO THROUGH LINE BY LINE ON THESE ITEMS. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, IN REGARDS TO THE SIGHTING, UM, I THINK ON PAGE 10 IS WHERE WE START THAT.
UM, THE, THE EXISTING SIGHTING IS ABOUT, WE ASSUME IT WAS ABOUT 60 40 OR OR TWO-THIRDS, ONE-THIRD ORIGINAL WOOD SIDING, WHICH KIND OF SIMILARLY MATCHES AN ALLEN AND ALLEN AA 5 3 6 PROFILE.
AND THEN THE REMAINING 40% TO ONE-THIRD OF THE SIDING HAS BEEN REPLACED OVER THE YEARS, I WOULD ASSUME MAYBE WHEN THE FIRE HAPPENED, UM, WITH A T 1 0 5 6 INCH LAPSE SIDING.
UM, AND SO THE, THE EXISTING SIDINGS, I GUESS IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH IN AND OF ITSELF, I GUESS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE.
UM, AND SO OUR, OUR INITIAL, OUR INITIAL ING THAT MOST OF THOSE
AND SO TO, TO SQUARE THE HOUSE UP, THEY NEED TO REMOVE THE SIDINGS TO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SIDINGS BASICALLY ACTING AS THE DIAPHRAGM FOR THE, FOR THE STRUCTURE.
SO FOR THEM TO PUSH AND PULL THE EXTERIOR FRAMING TO SQUARE IT UP, THE SIDING NEEDS TO BE REMOVED, UM, AS THEY'VE DONE THAT PROCESS CURRENTLY, UM, OUR, OUR CONTRACTOR HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED FOR FRAMING AND FOUNDATION PERMITS THROUGH STAFF AND HAS RECEIVED APPROVAL AND PERMITS FOR THOSE ITEMS. SO THAT WORK IS GOING ON.
THEY HAVE REMOVED A PORTION OF THE EXISTING SIDING ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, WHICH NONE OF THE BACK OF THE HOUSE WAS THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC PROFILE.
IT'S ALL BEEN REPLACED AT SOME POINT WITH THE, UM, SIX INCH LAP SIDING.
UM, THE SMALL PORTIONS THEY'VE REMOVED ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS, THE SIDE ELEVATIONS OF THE EXISTING SIDING.
IT'S BEEN DAMAGED, I WOULD CONTEND FURTHER THAN REPAIR TO BE PUT BACK UP.
UM, AND SO THAT'S KIND OF, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR RESPONSE ON THIS COMMENT WAS THAT MAYBE WE COULD SAVE HALF THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC PROFILE AND USE IT FOR THE, THE SECOND FLOOR AND THEN CUT A TRIM BOARD AT THE FLOOR LINE AND DO NEW WOOD SIDING BELOW, UM, TO KIND OF DISTINGUISH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN UPSTAIRS UNIT AND A DOWNSTAIRS UNIT, BUT ALSO TO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE HOUSE ITSELF DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF ARTICULATION ON THE FACADE WITHIN THE PUNCHED OPENING, SO IT'D GIVE US ANOTHER, UM, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER LINE TO, TO GIVE THE HOUSE SOME TYPE OF ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE WITH A BASE AND A AND A AND, UM, YOU KNOW, A TOP PROFILE AS OPPOSED TO JUST BEING A MONOLITHIC SIDING.
UM, NOW LOOKING BACK AT IT, I DON'T, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF THE EXISTING SITE IS GOING TO BE SALVAGEABLE.
AND SO IF, IF THAT'S THE CASE, IF WE ARE, WE'RE OPEN TO DOING WOOD SIGHTING.
UM, BUT I THINK MATCHING THAT EXISTING PROFILE AND SOMETHING THAT'S NOT
[02:00:01]
NECESSARILY AS READILY AVAILABLE AS THE LAPSE SIDING OF A 1 0 5 PROFILE OR OF THE LAPSE SIDING OF THE E ONE 17 PROFILE, WHICH IS ALSO, YOU KNOW, CONSISTENT WITH HOUSES OF THIS VINTAGE, I THINK WE WOULD BE OPEN TO, TO DIFFERENT SIDING CHOICES THAN MATCHING THE HISTORIC PROFILE THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY ELIGIBLE ANYMORE.UM, GOING TO THE ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE, THE BALCONY.
UM, WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WE CAN INSTALL A, A BALCONY, UH, RAILING WITH THE SIMILAR PROFILE OF THE, OF THE WOOD.
UM, BALLISTERS ONLY STIPULATION IS WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE, YOU KNOW, GO IN WITH A BAER, UH, PLACEMENT OF FOUR INCH ON CENTER INSTEAD OF THE SEVEN OR EIGHT INCH ON CENTER JUST FOR CODE REASONS OF NOT HAVING, UH, THE ELONGATED SPACING.
UH, FOR MODERN MODERN REPLACEMENT, UH, THE, THE TONGUE AND GROOVE DECKING IS TO BE REPLACED WITH IN TIME MATERIAL.
UM, ON THAT, ON THAT SECOND FLOOR BALCONY ON THE FRONT ELEVATION.
ITEM NUMBER THREE, UM, THE EXISTING PORCH IS AND BALCONY ARE BASICALLY ALL FRAMED WITH TWO BY TREATED MATERIAL.
UM, I THINK THE COMMENT WAS THAT THE, THE REPLACE THE DECKING WITH ONE BY THREE TON AND GROOVE, BUT THE EXISTING IS NOT ONE BY THREE TON AND GROOVE.
IT'S FIVE QUARTER BY FIVE AND A HALF, UM, STANDARD DECK BOARDS, WE WOULD PROPOSE TO GO BACK IN WITH TWO BY SIX DECK BOARDS, FRAME IT SIMILARLY WITH A, UM, FOUR BY SIX COLUMNS, TWO BY BEAMS AND RAPTORS WITH A, UM, WITH A TWO BY SIX DECK BOARD NOT COMING GROOVE.
UM, BUT KNOWING THAT IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A WEATHER STRUCTURE, IT'S A, AN ACCESS POINT FOR THE BACK OF THE HOUSE TO GET INTO THE, THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT MAKING IT WEATHER TIGHT ON THAT BACK SIDE.
UM, SO INSTALL THE DECK BOARDS, I GUESS PERPENDICULAR TO THE HOUSE THAT CAN BE DONE.
IT'S JUST ANOTHER LAYER OF FUR STRIPS, UM, TO DO THAT.
IF THAT'S NOT REQUIRED, I WOULD, I WOULD BE JUST AS HAPPY TO JUST INSTALL THE DECK BOARDS RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO THE HOUSE, UH, TO SAVE A LEVEL OF FRAMING.
BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON THE TOP OF MY LIST OF REAL CONCERNS, I GUESS.
UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR WAS THE HISTORICAL FENESTRATION PATTERNS.
IF YOU CAN SEE THE WINDOWS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE FROM THE, UM, THE NEXT SLIDE, THERE'LL BE BACK TWO WINDOWS ON EACH FLOOR.
UM, THERE'S A BACK BEDROOM THAT IS ROUGHLY NINE FOOT SIX BY 10 FEET.
AND IF YOU GO BACK TO THE FLOOR PLAN ON PAGE NINE, UM, THE WINDOWS AREN'T CENTERED IN THAT ROOM.
ONE SHIFTED TO THE CORNER, AND THEN THE OTHER WINDOWS ARE OFF CENTER ON THE REAR ELEVATION.
UM, MAKES A LITTLE AWKWARD FOR FURNITURE PLACEMENT IN THAT ROOM WITH BEING SUCH A SMALL BEDROOM AND HAVING MULTIPLE WINDOWS.
UM, ON, ON THE TWO, ON THE TWO FACES, UM, THAT'S PURELY A INTERIOR, UM, YOU KNOW, DESIGN KIND OF, KIND OF ADDRESS SITUATION WHERE WE PREFER TO REMOVE THOSE WINDOWS JUST SO WE CAN HAVE A, A, A BEDROOMS PLACEMENT, UH, YOU KNOW, FURNITURE PLACEMENT TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.
UM, I THINK IT'S NOTED THAT WE'RE, WE'RE REMOVING THE WINDOWS ON THE FAR BACKSIDE OF THAT ELEVATION, SO IT'S KIND OF SKEWED NOT REALLY ALL THAT NOTICEABLE FROM THE STREET.
AND THAT ELEVATION, IF YOU LOOK AT FROM THE, THE NEXT PAGE UP ON, ON PAGE EIGHT, UM, THAT ELEVATION STILL HAS FOUR SETS OF DOUBLE PUNCHED OPENINGS ON IT.
UM, SO YOU KNOW, THERE'S, WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY DIMINISHING THAT ELEVATION BY REMOVING WINDOWS.
I THINK THERE'S STILL A REPRESENTATION OF A LOT OF WINDOWS ON THAT, ON THAT SPACE.
UM, WE DID ACT, WE DID ASK TO REMOVE A COUPLE OF UNDER WINDOWS ON THE ORIGINAL, THE MIDDLE, AND THAT WAS FOR THE, THE WINDOW ON THE NORTH ELEVATION THAT IS IN THE NEXT TO THE STAIR.
THAT WAS PURELY A, UM, A PROCESS OF ALL THE EXISTING ELECTRICAL METERS AND DISCONNECTS ARE IN THAT AREA AND IT'S JUST REALLY TIGHT AND THAT WINDOW DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THE WINDOW ABOVE.
AND SO OUR INITIAL THOUGHT WAS, HEY, CAN WE REMOVE THAT WINDOW BECAUSE IT'S NOT SYMMETRICAL WITH THE WINDOW ABOVE? AND IT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT CREATES A SITUATION WITH TWO METERS AND ALL THE ELECTRICAL GEAR FOR THE SERVICE TO THE HOUSE.
IT'S ALL TIGHTENED THAT EXISTING CORNER.
BUT WE'VE SINCE GONE BACK AND IF, IF WE CAN'T REMOVE THAT WINDOW, WE'RE FINE PUTTING, YOU KNOW, REUSING THAT WINDOW KIND OF IN THAT PLACE, UM, IN THAT AREA.
UM, THE NEXT ITEM WAS THE STEEL DOORS.
UM, WE'VE COME BACK, WE'VE, WE'VE PROPOSED TO REPLACE ALL THE DOORS WITH WOOD STYLING RAIL DOORS.
IT'S A HALF LIGHT WITH A NINE, UM, A NINE LIGHT DESIGN ALL FIVE DOORS.
THE TWO FRONT DOORS FOR THE ENTRIES, THE, THE SECOND FLOOR BALCONY DOOR ON THE FRONT ALLEGATION AND THE TWO EXIT OR THE TWO BALCONY DOORS ON THE BACK ELEVATION TO REPLACE ALL WITH THE SAME DOOR, UH, TO BE PAINTED.
[02:05:01]
NUMBER SEVEN FOR THE WATER HEATER.UH, WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH WHATEVER SIDING WE GET APPROVED FOR, UM, ON THE GROUND FLOOR.
WE WILL MATCH THAT FOR THE WATER HEATER AND GO BACK IN WITH THE SAME, THE SAME PROFILE WITH, UM, THE FOUNDATION SKIRTING WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH.
WE CAN DO A COMPOSITE MATERIAL FOR THE FOUNDATION SKIRTING.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 10, THE SOFFIT AND THE FASCIA.
UM, WE'RE FINE REMOVING THE, THE FASCIA AND, AND SOFFIT TREATMENT.
UM, AND JUST LEAVING THE EXPOSED RAPTURE TAILS.
UM, NUMBER NINE, THE PORCH COLUMNS, AGAIN, WE'RE KIND OF CONCEDING THE EXISTING PORCH BASICALLY NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY DEMOED.
THE, THERE'S A LOT OF WOOD ROTT AT THE SECOND FLOOR LEVEL.
UM, ALL THE MAIN BEAMS, ALL THE RAPTORS ALL NEED TO BE REPLACED.
THE EXISTING COLUMNS ARE JUST BUILT UP BOX COLUMNS.
THEY'RE NOT SOLID WOOD CONSTRUCTION.
UM, SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO REPLACE THE ROUGHLY SIX AND A HALF BY SIX INCH BOX COLUMNS WITH A SIX BY SIX COLUMN AND WE'LL MATCH THE CAPITAL AND BASE TREATMENT FOR THOSE COLUMNS.
ITEM NUMBER 11 IS JUST THE SUBMITTAL OF THE PAINT COLORS THEMSELVES.
AND THEN ITEM NUMBER 12 IS THE IMAGE OF THE GRAVEL, UH, PROPOSED USING A THREE QUARTER INCH WASH LIMESTONE GRAVEL FOR THE DRIVEWAY.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR POSITION ON, UH, ON STIPULATION NUMBER 10 REGARDING THE SOFFIT? UH, THE PATIENT SOFFIT? WE ARE FINE REMOVING, WE ARE FINE NOT DOING A NEW SOFFIT AND FACIA BOARD ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE ROOF.
WE'RE, WE'LL LEAVE THE HISTORIC FORM IN THE EXPOSED RAPTOR TAIL.
AND WE HAVE, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS, PLEASE.
YES, THIS COMES FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY 1 0 7.
KING WILLIAM CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 11, 12 MONTHS, ESPECIALLY REGARDING RETENTION OF ORIGINAL MATERIALS AND REPLACEMENT MATERIALS THAT ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE GOVERNMENT HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
WE AGREE THE WINDOWS SHOULD BE REPAIRED AND NOT REPLACED.
AND SO THE, A QUICK NOTE ON THE WINDOWS, I GUESS, OF THE 28 EXISTING WINDOWS, ONLY NINE OF THEM ARE ORIGINAL, UM, WITH THE, YOU KNOW, WITH THE WEIGHTED PULLEY SLIDES AND EVERYTHING THAT, UH, I GUESS OVER THE, OVER THE YEARS THEY'VE BEEN REPLACED.
AND, UM, THERE'S A COUPLE OF NINE BY NINE LIGHT WINDOWS ON THE FRONT ELEVATION AND ON THE SIDE AND REAR ELEVATIONS AS WELL.
UM, WE WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO REPAIR THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS AS THEY, AS THEY SIT IN PLACE OR AFTER THEY'RE REMOVED TO SCORE UP THE FRAMING.
BUT, UM, GO BACK IN WITH THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS UNDER, I GUESS UNDER THE STIPULATION OF THAT, IF, IF THEY GET TO A POINT WHERE THE REPAIR OF THEM IS, UM, FINANCIALLY NOT BENEFICIAL TO GO IN WITH A, A NEW CONSTRUCTION WOOD WINDOW SIMILAR TO HOW THE PREVIOUS APPLICANT THAT JELLED WIND W 2,500, UM, WOOD WINDOW TO BE, TO REPLACE ALL THE EXISTING WOOD WINDOW OPENINGS.
SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AGAIN.
I I'M GONNA DO A QUICK RECAP TO MAKE SURE I'M, I'M TRACKING, UH, UH, WITH THE STIPULATIONS THAT YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH AND THEN WE CAN TARGET IN, UH, MAYBE OUR DISCUSSION ON THOSE THAT, THAT, UH, THAT REQUIRE FURTHER DIALOGUE, YOUR AGREEMENT.
MAKE SURE, MAKE SURE, UH, I GOT THIS RIGHT WITH STIPULATION NUMBER 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, AND 12.
IS THAT CORRECT? I CAN, I CAN JUST READ THAT AGAIN.
SIX IS THE, WELL, SIX IS THE DOORS AND WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA REPLACE THEM WITH WOOD DOORS, I GUESS THAT WE WERE, I THINK THE, THE STAFF WAS ONLY THE BOTTOM DOORS WE REPLACED.
WE'RE GONNA SAY ALL FIVE OF THE EXTERIOR DOORS BE REPLACED WITH NEW WOOD DOORS.
UM, YES, THOSE NUMBERS ARE OKAY.
SO STAFF IS, THEY DO HAVE A STIPULATION ON THAT.
UH, YOU'RE WANTING DO ALL FIVE, BUT YOU'RE AGREEMENT THAT THEY WOULD BE WOOD? YES, SIR.
OKAY, SO THAT'S A PARTIAL AGREEMENT.
WE'LL,
UM, OKAY, SO THE, AND EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I GUESS A PARTIAL, UH, AGREEMENT ON NUMBER NINE, GOING BACK WITH SOLID WOOD COLUMNS, BUT REPLICATING THE BASE AND CAPITAL TO MATCH EXISTING.
YEAH, I WAS GONNA GO BACK TO RECAP.
[02:10:01]
UH, I THINK THERE'S STILL DISCUSSION.SO THE ONES THAT, THAT WE SHOULD KIND OF TARGET IN THE DISCUSSION ON ARE THE HISTORIC SIDING.
UM, WE DISCUSSED, UH, THE ISSUES OF, OF HAVING TO SQUARE UP THE FRAME AND HOW THAT'S REQUIRING YOU TO REMOVE THE, UH, THE SIDING.
ARE YOU ALSO DOING THERMAL UPGRADES THAT AS WELL PUTTING IN INSULATION? YES.
AND THAT, I MEAN, WE'RE GONNA BE REMOVING THE SIDING.
WE'RE GONNA GO IN WITH, UM, THERE'S NO SHEATHING LAYER.
I MEAN THE TYPICAL OF HOUSES OF THIS VINTAGE, IT'S THE SIDING DIRECTLY TO THE STUDS AND SO THERE'S NO, YOU KNOW, WE'LL, WE'LL BE GOING IN WITH A, YOU KNOW, A HALF INCH SHEATHING AND A WATERPROOFING LAYER, UM, AND THEN REINSTALLING WHATEVER, WHATEVER SIDING WE COME TO AGREEMENT ON.
SO ITEM THREE, THE DECK, UH, EVERYONE'S IN AGREEMENT THAT'S WOOD WITH THE, THE DISCUSSION IS THE SIZE OF IT, THE EXISTINGS FIVE, FOUR, UH, BY FIVE AND A HALF.
AND, UH, STAFF WAS WANTING I THINK A THREE INCH.
AND, AND TELL ME AGAIN YOUR PROPOSAL.
YOU WERE GOING UP FIVE AND A HALF, BUT NOT TONGUE AND GROOVE, RIGHT? UH, YEAH, I MEAN THE EXISTINGS NOT TONGUE AND GROOVE.
IT'S A FIVE QUARTER BY FIVE AND A HALF RIGHT DECK BOARD.
UH, I MEAN, JUST FOR DURABILITY, WE'D PROBABLY GO IN WITH AT LEAST A TWO BY SIX DECK BOARD THAT WOULD NOT BE TONGUE AND GROOVE.
UM, JUST BASICALLY TEAR, TEAR THE PORCH DOWN AND BUILD IT WITH NEW MATERIALS IN KIND.
SO IT WOULD BE AN INCH AND A HALF INSTEAD OF AN INCH OF THE CURRENT FIVE FOUR, UH, MATERIAL, CORRECT? YES SIR.
AND, AND AS PART OF, I, I THINK I SKIPPED OVER AS PART OF NUMBER THREE AS WELL, WE'RE NOT, WE WOULD NOT PROPOSE TO DO THE SPIRAL STAIRCASE ANYMORE.
UM, WE'VE SHIFTED THE STAIR, THE EXISTING STAIR IS DIRECTLY IN LINE WITH THE BACK DOORS.
AND SO LOOKING OUT THE GROUND FLOOR, YOU SEE THE BACKSIDE OF THE STAIR WE'RE PROPOSING TO MOVE THE STAIR TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT DECK AND STILL, STILL RUN THE SAME DIRECTION, BUT SLIDE IT OVER ROUGHLY SEVEN OR EIGHT FEET TO THE NORTH.
AND THAT'S PART OF THE KINDA THE NEW PRESENTATION THAT YOU MADE TODAY THAT WASN'T IN OUR ORIGINAL PACKET, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
YEAH, YOU CAN SEE FROM THE FLOOR PLAN ON PAGE ON PAGE NINE, THE STAIRS MOVED OVER TO THE, THE, UH, PLAN LEFT INSTEAD OF THE, INSTEAD OF BEING DIRECTLY IN, IN FRONT OF THE EXTERIOR DOORS, IT'S, IT'S TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
THEN TO RECAP YOUR, UH, PROPOSAL ON THE WINDOWS, UM, YOU'RE PROPOSING TO RETAIN THE NINE THAT YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AS THE ORIGINAL ONES OUTTA THE 28TH, CORRECT? YEAH, SO I MEAN OUR, OUR PROPOSAL IS THERE'S, OF THE 28 WINDOWS, IF WE WOULD REPLACE THE ONES THAT DO NOT MATCH CURRENTLY, I MEAN THERE'S CURRENTLY I THINK SEVEN WINDOWS THAT ARE OF A DIVIDED MUTTON DESIGN.
WE WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE WOULD GO BACK, ALL THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS ARE A SINGLE LIGHT OVER SINGLE LIGHT DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW, UM, WITH, WITH NO INTEGRAL MUTTON PATTERNS.
AND SO WE WOULD PROPOSE THAT ALL THOSE OTHER MUTTONS WINDOWS BE REPLACED WITH A SALVAGED WOOD WINDOW, UM, YOU KNOW, A RECLAIMED WOOD WINDOW OF THE SAME TIME PERIOD.
AND THEN, UM, BUT JUST I, I GUESS AS WE GET INTO REPAIRING THESE WOOD WINDOWS, UM, I THINK IT WAS NOTED THAT THEY'RE NOT IN, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT IN TOO BAD OF SHAPE, BUT WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, WOULD THE OPTION BE THERE TO REPLACE THEM WITH WOOD WINDOWS, A MORE MODERN ENERGY EFFICIENT WOOD WINDOW SINCE ONLY NINE OF THE 29 ARE ACTUALLY ORIGINAL, OR NINE OF THE 28 ARE ACTUALLY ORIGINAL.
'CAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF ITEMS IN THIS, UM, YEAH, THIS REQUEST AND JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I HAD CLARITY OF THOSE.
UM, AND, AND JUST TO COMMENT ON THE WINDOWS, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT MATCHING, UM, AND WE'RE CLEARLY LATER REPLACEMENTS, UH, YOU KNOW, IN PRESERVATION PRACTICE AND, AND STANDARDS, YOU KNOW, EVEN LATER ADDITIONS OR MODIFICATIONS CAN GAIN HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OVER TIME.
I DON'T KNOW IF THESE DO HAVE THAT OR NOT, BUT THAT, THAT IS PART OF THE STORY OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL, THAT, THAT APPARENTLY AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER IT LOST SOME OF ITS WINDOWS AND THEY WERE CHANGED OUT LATER.
BUT I, I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO DECIDE WHETHER, WHETHER THAT IS A, AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE STORY TO TELL HERE.
ONE OTHER ITEM THAT, UH, I BELIEVE IS UP FOR DISCUSSION IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS REMOVING, UH, WINDOWS AT THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
UM, I CAN CONTRIBUTE MY THOUGHTS
[02:15:01]
TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR.UM, I THINK THOSE ARE, ARE, UH, PRETTY PROMINENT IN THIS ELEVATION.
UM, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE RETAINED.
THEY CAN BE BLANKED ON THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMMODATE, UH, THE MODIFICATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT MAY WANT, BUT I WOULD SUPPORT, UH, STAFF'S FINDINGS ON THOSE, UH, OR ON THOSE, UH, REMOVALS.
I GUESS, UH, AS A, AS A COUNTER TO THAT, WOULD IT BE ACCEPT, I MEAN, THE, THERE'S ALSO THE TWO WINDOWS ON THE BACK ELEVATION OF THE, OF THE FACADE AS WELL.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF THE, IF THE COMMENT IS THAT THE WINDOWS ON THE PERMANENT LOCATION BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S VIEWABLE FROM THE STREET, THEN, UM, YOU KNOW, WOULD, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO REMOVAL OF THE, THE WINDOWS ON THE, ON THE BACKSIDE STAFF? WILL YOU PULL UP THOSE WINDOWS ONE MORE TIME OF THE DOUBLE, THE DOUBLE WINDOWS ON THE BACK? NO, I THINK THOSE WOULD, THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE RETAINED AS WELL.
UH, A AGAIN, I KNOW YOU, I KNOW YOU DON'T WANT SUCH A SMALL ROOM WITH FOUR WINDOWS, UH, BECAUSE OF THE SCALE OF THE ROOM, UH, STAFF HAS SOME, WE HAVE, WE USUALLY SUGGEST THAT THEY, THAT THEY BE BLANKED WHEN IT COMES TO, WHEN IT COMES TO THE, UH, THE UN, THE NON-MATCHING WINDOWS.
UM, I'M INCLINED, I'M INCLINED TO MEET YOU HALFWAY THERE, UH, AND ALLOW REPLACEMENT OF THOSE TYPES THAT CAME LATER THAT ARE MOST ASSOCIATED, UH, ON THE FIRST LEVEL IN THE FRONT AND BACK, UH, WITH A WINDOW MORE COMPATIBLE TO THE ORIGINAL.
BUT THOSE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, THE, THE WINDOWS THEMSELVES ARE, ARE IMPORTANT THAT THEY BE RETAINED.
IF YOU FIND THAT THE WINDOWS ARE DAMAGED BEYOND REPAIR, PLEASE GO TO STAFF WITH THAT.
STAFF CAN GIVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL FOR REPLACEMENT OF, OF THOSE WINDOWS THAT ARE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR.
I DON'T KNOW, UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS COM, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN OR COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UH, FROM TO COMMENT ON COMMISSIONER FISH'S, UH, COMMENT, UH, STAFF DID PERFORM A SITE VISIT ON, UH, JULY THE 23RD, UH, AND FOUND THE WINDOWS TO BE IN A STATE OF RELATIVELY GOOD CONDITION THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO BE REPAIRED.
UM, STARTING ON PAGE, UH, 28 OF THE APPLICATION PACKET, UM, THERE ARE STAFF'S PHOTOS OF THE WINDOWS, UM, AND FOR THE SOLID MAJORITY, IF NOT ALL, UM, THE TOP END BOTTOM SASHES ARE INTACT.
YEAH, I MEAN, OUR, OUR, OUR INTENTION IS TO INITIALLY GO IN AND TRY TO REPAIR THE WINDOWS, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE GENERAL NOTE OF MOST OF THEM LOOK TO BE IN REPAIRABLE STATE.
IT WAS JUST A, A COMMENT OF IF WE, IF WE TURN INTO SOME, IF WE, IF WE GET INTO IT AND IT'S NOT THAT WAY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GO BACK TO STAFF AND ADDRESS.
AND YES, STAFF WOULD BE ABLE TO WORK WITH YOU ON, UH, REPLACEMENT IN KIND IF, UH, YOU COME ACROSS SOME SASH THAT ARE, UH, NOT REPAIRABLE.
YEAH, I BELIEVE I CAN SUPPORT, UH, I DO WANT TO QUICKLY INTERJECT THOUGH THAT IF THERE'S NOT AGREEMENT BETWEEN US AND THE APPLICANT, ULTIMATELY, IF WHETHER SOMETHING IS REPAIRABLE, THEN IT MIGHT BE REFERRED BACK HERE.
C CERTAINLY, UM, I WOULD, I THINK I COULD, UH, CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER FISH AND ALLOWING THE APPLICANT TO REPLACE THE MULTI LIGHT WINDOWS THAT, UH, ARE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING WITH ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS.
I WOULD ALSO CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER FISH ON THE FACT THAT THE, UH, THE WINDOWS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED IN THE SMALL BEDROOMS AT THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, UM, SHOULD BE MAINTAINED.
AND IF THE, UM, APPLICANT NEEDED, UM, FELT HE NEEDED ADDITIONAL WALL SPACE INTERIOR, UH, IN THOSE SPACES THAT, UM, THEY COULD BE, UM, FUR OUT OR BLANKED OFF ON THE INTERIOR, BUT ON THE EXTERIOR, I BELIEVE THEY NEED TO BE MAINTAINED.
UM, MAY I, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
CAN I ASK STAFFS POSITION ON THE STAIR NOW THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A SPIRAL STAIR? HAVE YOU ALL UPDATED YOUR, YOUR THOUGHTS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR THE, THE, UH, RELOCATION BUT STILL KEEPING A STRAIGHT RUN STAIR BACK THERE?
[02:20:02]
THE, THE PROFILE OF THE UPDATE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED, UM, STAFF FIND THAT TO BE APPROPRIATE.UM, STAFF'S COMMENT PREVIOUSLY, UM, THERE WASN'T A DETAIL OF A STAIR INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION PACKAGE.
UM, SO THAT WAS STAFF'S PRIMARY CONCERN, WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMETHING THAT WAS SUBMITTED WAS APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURALLY FOR THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
UH, WHAT'S BEING SHOWN HERE, UM, IS THAT THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE ISN'T VISIBLE FROM THE, THE, THE RIGHT OF WAY.
IS IT LOCATED ON A PRIMARY FACADE AND APPEARS TO BE APPROPRIATE, AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE FACT THAT HE'S SHIFTING THE STAIR IN ORDER, I THINK TO CREATE A LITTLE MORE OF A BACKYARD AREA AND A BETTER APPROACH TO THAT BOTTOM PORCH.
I, SO THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED DISCUSSION ON THE SIDING ISSUE AND THEN THE REAR DECK CONSTRUCTION.
SO THE COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, AGAIN, YOUR POSITION RIGHT NOW THEN IS YOU, YOU HAD SEVERAL, UH, SUGGESTIONS THERE, RETAINING A PORTION OF IT AND USING IT UPSTAIRS AND MAYBE HAVING A, A STRINGER COURSE THAT SEPARATED THE OLD FROM THE NEW.
BUT, UM, I THINK YOU UPDATE YOUR POSITION BY SAYING YOU THINK THAT WHEN, WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REMOVING IT ALL TO STRAIGHTEN UP AND, AND TO REINFORCE THE, THE SUPERSTRUCTURE THAT YOU DON'T THINK YOU'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO SALVAGE, UH, THAT MUCH OF THE, OF THE SIDING, IS THAT A, A FAIR, UH, ENCAPSULATION OF YOUR POSITION? YES, SIR.
I MEAN, I THINK, LIKE I SAID, I, I THINK WE ARE OPTIMISTICALLY HOPING THAT HALF OF THIS SIDING, ORIGINALLY WE WERE HOPING HALF OF THE SIDING WILL BE SALVAGEABLE, AND WE'D USE THAT FOR THE UPPER FLOOR, THEN COME INTO DETERMINATION THAT HALF THE SIDING'S NOT, YOU KNOW, A THIRD OF THE SIDING'S, NOT THE SAME SIDING.
SO THAT CUTS OUR SALVAGEABLE PORTION DOWN TO BE REUSED.
AND THEN NOW KNOWING THE CONDITION AS SOME OF IT'S COMING OFF THE STRUCTURE, IT, I, I'M, I'M WEARY THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION TO EVEN PUT BACK UP, I GUESS.
SO MY COMMENT NOW WOULD BE, I, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THE EXISTING SIDINGS OR I DON'T THINK A LARGE PORTION OF THE EXISTING SIDING IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE REUSED.
AND SO I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE GO IN WITH WOOD SIDINGS, A NEW WOOD SIDING FOR THE ENTIRE FACADE, AND OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON, IF, YOU KNOW, ON A, ON A PROFILE OF THAT.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, MATCHING, DOING, DOING SOMETHING AS A BASE COURSE, A TRIM BOARD AT THE FLOOR LINE AND A DIFFERENT COSING ABOVE THAT, UM, IS OUR, YOU KNOW, KIND OF OUR CONCEPT THAT WE'VE BEEN GOING WITH TO DISTINGUISH THAT IT IS A DUPLEX, IT'S TWO UNITS.
UM, BUT THE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT, I DON'T THINK WE'RE, WE'RE NOT MARRIED EITHER WAY ON, ON WHAT THAT SIDING HAS TO BE.
UM, I JUST DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE ENOUGH TO SALVAGE.
AND THE PROFILE THAT THE, THE, THE MAJORITY OF THE PREPONDERANCE OF SIDING IS IN, IS THAT READILY AVAILABLE FOR YOU FOR REPLACEMENT? UM, I, IT, IT'S A MILLED SIDING.
I MEAN, I THINK I, I FOUND ALLEN AND ALLEN AA 5 3 6 IS CLOSE TO THE PROFILE.
UM, BUT IT'S, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S READILY AVAILABLE, I GUESS.
I MEAN, BUT IT IS, I MEAN, IT'S DIFFERENT.
IT'S A LOT OF NEIGHBORING HOUSES, BUT, YOU KNOW, A T ONE 17 SIDING IS ALSO ON A LOT OF NEIGHBORING HOUSES TOO, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S MUCH MORE READILY AVAILABLE, UM, AS A REPLACEMENT WOOD SIDING.
SO THIS, THIS, I'M JUST GONNA THROW THIS OUT HERE FOR DISCUSSION AND FOR MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO MILL OVER, UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF, OF, YOU KNOW, REPLACEMENT, WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF THE SIDING, UH, WITH A PROFILE THAT'S CLOSE TO WHATEVER THE MOST PREVALENT, UH, LARGEST PERCENTAGE OF SIDING IS, IS COMPRISED OF.
UM, AND IF, UH, THERE COULD MAYBE BE A REUSE, A RES RESET, UH, A SALING REUSE MAYBE AS AN INTERIOR SOMEWHERE SELECTIVELY WITHIN THE, THE UNITS, UH, SO THAT THE MATERIAL JUST DOESN'T COMPLETELY GO AWAY, BUT MAYBE THERE'S A, A LITTLE BIT OF A RECALL, A LITTLE HOMAGE PAY TO WHAT THE ORIGINAL SIDING WAS.
SOMETHING YOU GUYS WOULD ENTERTAIN? YEAH, IT'S ACTUALLY SOMETHING WE'VE ALREADY PLANNED.
WE'VE GOT AN EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY, WHICH WAS THE CULPRIT OF THE FIRE ORIGINALLY, THAT'S, THAT'S IN THE FRONT LIVING ROOM.
UM, LOOKING AT DOING A, A, SOME OF THAT EXISTING SIDING THAT WE CAN SALVAGE AND, AND SCRAPE AS A, YOU KNOW, SHIPROCK ACCENT WALL NEXT TO THE EXISTING BRICK.
BUT, AND THEN ALSO USING PORTIONS OF IT, UM, POSSIBLY IN THE KITCHEN, UM, AS WELL.
AND JUST, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY BEING TIMES THAT I'M NOT JUST THROWING IT AWAY, UM, BUT LIKE A LOT OF IT'S NOT,
[02:25:01]
IT'S NOT, NOT ABLE TO BE, I MEAN, A LOT OF IT'S JUST NEEDS TO BE THROWN AWAY, I GUESS, OR, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF, IT'S NOT THE, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT COMING OFF AND, AND AS WE EXPECTED IT TO BE, BUT WE ARE, WE ARE VERY OPEN TO REUSING PORTIONS OF IT AND OR EVEN MEETING SOMEONE OUTSIDE, YOU KNOW, AND SAYING, HEY, YOU'D BE BETTER IF YOU SAVE THIS OR THIS, OR, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK WE'RE OPEN TO USING ON INTERIOR ASPECT OR, UM, YOU KNOW, FINDING OTHER USES TO, TO SALVAGE THAT, DECIDING THAT THAT IS MEANT TO BE SAVED.UM, I, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS, BUT, BUT THEY MIGHT NOT ADD, ADD CLARITY.
YOU KNOW, WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT IS A REALLY, I THINK IT'S A REALLY SERIOUS THING TO CONSIDER.
AND WE'RE KIND OF ON A, ON A TIPPING POINT WITH THIS BEING THAT 60% OR LESS OF THE HOUSE HAS, UM, PERHAPS THE ORIGINAL PROFILE.
UM, I THINK MAYBE IT'S THE OPPOSITE.
MAYBE 40% HAS THE ORIGINAL PROFILE AND A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT HAS BEEN REPLACED.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
IS THERE ENOUGH OF THE, DO YOU THINK YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SALVAGE ENOUGH OF THE HISTORIC SITING TO REPLACE THE, THE SITING ASSOCIATED WITH THIS STREET FACING ELEVATION, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE ON BOTH LEVELS? UH, YEAH, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW.
I'M NOT NECESSARILY A BIG FAN OF CHANGING SIDING PROFILES ON AN OUTSIDE CORNER FROM FACE-TO-FACE, BUT I MEAN, I, I, I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY ENOUGH TO MAYBE DO THE, THE FRONT ELEVATION GIVEN THE, THE FOUR, THE THREE DOORS AND TWO PUNCH WINDOWS ON THAT.
I MEAN, I'M NOT A FAN OF THAT EITHER.
UM, THERE IS A TRIM PIECE THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THE PORCH THAT TURNS THE CORNER.
SO I, THE ONLY REASON I RAISED THE RAISED THE QUESTION IS THE PROPOSAL THAT WE SAW THAT THERE WAS GONNA BE ENOUGH SIDING TO GO ACROSS THE LOWER PART OF THE HOUSE OR THE UPPER PART OF THE HOUSE JUST ISN'T THE CASE.
YOU'VE TOLD US THAT THAT'S NOT ACHIEVABLE.
SO NOW WE'RE LEFT WITH, SO NOW WE'RE LEFT WITH THE ISSUE OF, WELL, HOW MUCH OF THIS DO WE EXPECT IS SALVAGEABLE AND HOW CAN IT BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT? AND, AND THAT'S JUST, UH, THE WAY I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS AS I'M APPROACHING, UH, THE ISSUE, UH, ON, ON ITEM ONE AND I'D, I'D LIKE TO GET SOME, SOME DISCUSSION FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FURTHER ON THAT, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
I WAS THINKING ALONG THE SAME LINES THAT, UH, IF THERE IS SOME SALVAGEABLE MATERIAL, UH, WOULD THERE BE ENOUGH TO DO IT ON THE, UH, THE STREET FACADE? UH, THE FACT THAT, THAT THERE ARE WINDOWS AND DOORS, UH, THERE'S NOT THAT MUCH THAT HAS TO BE LONG RUNNING, UH, BOARDS, UH, AND HOPEFULLY THERE WOULD BE ENOUGH OF THE ORIGINAL TO, UH, REPLACE THE, THE FRONT FACADE.
AND AS COMMISSIONER FISH POINTED OUT, THERE IS A TRIM PIECE AT THE, UH, OUTSIDE EDGES OF THE PORCH THAT WOULD, UH, BE ABLE TO DIFFERENTIATE AS YOU TURN THE CORNER FROM ONE, UH, FROM THE ORIGINAL SIDING TO, UH, REPLACEMENT SIDING.
UM, I THINK IF THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT THE REAR DECK GO BACK AS WOOD, UM, AND IT'S ACTUALLY A THICKER PARTIER STOCK OF WOOD BECAUSE IT'S GOING FROM THE FIVE FOUR TO A, UH, YOU KNOW, MORE CONVENTIONAL, UH, ONE AND A HALF NOMINAL TWO INCH PIECE, UH, IT'LL WEATHER BE BETTER OVER TIME.
UM, YOU KNOW, WOOD IN AN HORIZONTAL EXPOSED CONDITION IS, IS, UH, IS PRETTY VULNERABLE.
SO I, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE FRAMED UP AS IT IS WHERE THE, THE BOARDS ARE GOING PERPENDICULAR TO, TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
UM, AND THAT JUST REQUIRES, UH, A LITTLE BIT MORE ADDITIONAL LATERAL BLOCKING UNDERNEATH TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, THAT SPAN DIRECTION.
SO I MEAN, THAT'S MY, MY POSITION.
MRS. COMMISSIONER FISH, I CON CON I CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, AS DO I, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER.
WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO HAVING A MOTION.
I BELIEVE THE MAJORITY OF THE ITEMS HAVE,
[02:30:02]
UM, AS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER HAD POINTED OUT, HAD BEEN, UH, AGREED TO, UH, BY THE APPLICANT OR HAD MADE, UH, PROPOSALS THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE TO STAFF.SO, UM, IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO, ANY MORE DISCUSSION OR IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ATTEMPT A MOTION CHAIRMAN, UH, THIS MR. CARPENTER, I'M SORRY, DID SOMEONE HAVE MORE DISCUSSION? OKAY.
I MEAN, I WAS, UH, THE APPLICANT DANIEL HERE, I WAS, I, I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT JUST DOING THE FRONT FACADE WITH EXISTING SIDING.
UM, YOU KNOW, HAVING IT LOOK, HAVING IT LOOK LIKE A FALSE HOLLYWOOD FRONT ESSENTIALLY OF YOU SPENT ALL YOUR MONEY HERE AND DOWN THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING, IT'S, IT GOES BACK TO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT MATCHING.
UM, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR WHAT, WHAT'S BEING DESCRIBED AS, WELL, IT'S NOT THAT MUCH SIDING ON THE FRONT, AND SO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SALVAGE ENOUGH THE BACK TO REDO THE FRONT ELEVATION.
BUT TO THE SAME POINT, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF SIDING ON THE FRONT.
IF IT'S REPLACED WITH THE SAME SIDINGS AROUND, I THINK IT BEING ALL CONSISTENT AND THE SAME HAS A, WOULD HAVE A MORE, WOULD LOOK BETTER THAN HAVING TWO SEPARATE SIGHTINGS ON THE HOUSE.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH, THANKS FOR THAT COMMENT.
UM, QUESTION FOR MI UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UH, ARE YOU, ARE YOU THINKING THAT THE SIGHTING THAT IS REPLACED SHOULD BE CLOSELY MATCHING TO THE HISTORIC SIGHTING? YEAH, I MEAN, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY MOTION.
SO I, I WAS HOPING THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING AND THE REPLACEMENT SIDING, UH, PROFILE WOULD BE MINIMAL AND, UH, PROBABLY IMPERCEPTIBLE UNLESS YOU GET UP CLOSER AND, AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT, BUT BE A SIMILAR DIMENSIONAL SCALE PROFILE AS, AS IS WHAT IS MOST READILY AVAILABLE TODAY.
SO I, I'LL, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, CHAIRMAN, I'LL, I'LL ATTEMPT A, A MOTION HERE WITH YOUR PATIENCE.
I'LL MUDDLE THROUGH IT AND HOPE MAYBE I'LL GET AN ASSIST FROM ONE OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON IF I MUFF IT UP.
SO, ON ITEM ONE, UM, UH, APPROVAL TO, UH, REMOVE, UH, THE SIDING IN ORDER TO DO, UM, THE NECESSARY REPAIRS OF STRAIGHTENING THE, THE SUPERSTRUCTURE, THEN REPLACING, UH, THE FRONT STREET FACADE WITH, UH, SALVAGED MATERIAL OF THE LARGEST PREVAILING, OR WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE ORIGINAL, UH, PROFILE.
AND THAT THE OTHER THREE, UH, FACADES RECEIVE A NEW SIDING MATERIAL OF SIMILAR PROFILE TO BE RE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY STAFF.
UH, ITEM TWO, UM, UH, THERE WAS A ACCEPTANCE ON THAT AND, UH, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT, UH, A FOUR INCH, UH, UH, SPACING BE PLACED WITH THE BAST STRADS AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT, AND AS REQUIRED BY CODE ITEM THREE, UM, THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE PORSCHE WITH, UH, WOOD USING, UH, STANDARD, UH, TWO BY, UH, SIX, UH, MATERIAL FRAMED PERPENDICULARLY TO THE, UH, STRUCTURE.
UH, ITEM FOUR, UH, AND FIVE, SORRY, ITEM FOUR IS, LEMME GO BACK TO THAT ONE REAL QUICK.
SORRY, WHILE I SCROLL THROUGH THINGS HERE.
UM, IS ITEM FOUR, THE REMOVAL OF THE WINDOWS, REMOVAL OF THE REAR SIDE WINDOWS? YEAH, THE REAR SIDES.
UM, A DENIAL OF ITEM FOUR, BUT AN ACCEPTANCE OF, UH, OF INTERIOR BLOCKING OF THAT WINDOW, IF THAT IS NECESSARY, UH, FOR FUNCTIONALITY OF THIS, OF THE SPACE.
UH, ITEM FIVE, UH, RETAINING THE NINE, UH, ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND REPAIRING THOSE, AND THEN REPLACING THE BALANCE WITH NEW WOOD WINDOWS TO MATCH, UH, AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE.
THE NINE ORIGINAL TO BE REVIEWED AND
[02:35:01]
RECEIVE FINAL APPROVAL BY STAFF.ITEM SIX I IS THE, UM, I'M, I'M GOING TO GO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UH, OF APPROVAL FOR ITEM SIX, THE DOOR REPLACEMENT FOR ONLY THE FRONT DOORS AND THE FIRST LEVEL AS NOTED IN FINDING H ITEM SEVEN, UH, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT TO THAT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
ITEM EIGHT, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT WITH THAT WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION ITEM NINE, AGREEMENT WITH THAT.
UH, BUT USING WITH, UH, NEW COLUMN TO MATCH THE CAPITAL AND BASE TRIM OF THE EXISTING ITEM 10, UH, APPROVAL OR AGREEMENT WITH STAFF.
STIPULATIONS ITEM 11, AGREEMENT WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND ITEM 12 AGREEMENT WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 10.
I THINK THAT RELIED RE RELATED TO, UH, INSULATION OF A FASCIA, AND I BELIEVE THAT SHOULD BE, IT WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT AND PROBABLY SHOULD BE A DENIAL.
ALRIGHT, SO DENIAL OF ITEM 10 AND A MODIFICATION FOR ITEM THREE AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE STAIR AS PRESENTED TODAY.
I, I LEFT, I LEFT, UH, ITEM THREE, TWO OUT IN MY ORIGINAL MOTION THERE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UM, I WAS TRACKING ALONG AS BEST I COULD AND UH, IT ALL SEEMS TO BE CLEAR TO ME, SO I'LL HAPPILY SECOND I, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AS STATED.
OKAY, THE NEXT, UM, JUST LIKE WE SAID EARLIER, ITEM 21, 5 29 NORTH PALMETTO HAS BEEN POSTPONED.
[20-4591 Address/Description: 801 LABOR ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-292 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Rudy Macias/LOCKE-MACIAS CHRISTINA ANN & RODOLFO MACIAS Request: Front and side yard fence installation City Council Dist.: 1]
SO THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 22.UM, RACHEL, ARE YOU THERE? YES.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 22 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 2 92 1 8 0 1 LABOR STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE THE EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE ON THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE WITH A FOUR FOOT METAL CATTLE PANEL FENCE TO INSTALL A NEW THREE FOOT HIGH METAL CATTLE PANEL FENCE ON THE FRONT AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES.
ITEM ONE, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF THE SIDE YARD FENCE BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH C.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FRONT YARD FENCE INSTALLATIONS BASED ON FINDING D THROUGH E WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS.
ONE THAT THE POSTS AND RAILS ON THE FRONT YARD FENCE ARE WOOD IN LIEU OF THE PROPOSED FULLY METAL FENCE.
AS NOTED IN FINDING D TWO, THE FINAL CONSTRUCTION HEIGHT OF AN APPROVED FENCE MAY NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT AS APPROVED BY THE H D R C AT ANY PORTION OF THE FENCE.
ADDITIONALLY, ALL FENCES MUST BE PERMITTED AND MEET THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OUTLINED IN THE U D C SECTION 35 DASH FIVE 14.
AS A CASE COMMENT, THIS CASE WAS PREVIOUSLY HEARD AT THE H D R C ON JULY 15TH.
DURING THAT HEARING, SOME CONFUSION AROSE, UM, ON WHETHER OR NOT A PREVIOUS APPROVAL HAD BEEN ISSUED FOR THE SIDE YARD FENCE.
UM, THE H D R C MOVED TO POSTPONE THAT CASE IN ORDER TO CLARIFY THE REQUEST AND WHETHER THERE WERE ANY PRIOR APPROVALS ON FILE.
UM, FOLLOWING THE JULY 15TH HEARINGS, STAFF DETERMINED THAT A SIDE YARD FENCE HAD ALREADY BEEN RIB PLACED.
UM, ON THE, ON A SITE VISIT ON JULY 16TH, THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE ANY PREVIOUSLY ISSUED CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR SIDE YARD FENCING, AND THE PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN ISSUED A PERMIT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE SIDE YARD FENCING.
SO THE REQUEST FOR BOTH SIDE YARD AND FRONT YARD FENCING REMAINS THE REQUEST UNDER REVIEW BEFORE THE H D R C AND THE APPLICANT
[02:40:01]
RUDY IS ON THE LINE.RUDY, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I'M HERE.
SO MY, MY NAME IS, UH, RUDY MACIAS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TO REVIEW OUR CASE.
UM, SO YEAH, UH, WE LIVE IN THE LAVACA NEIGHBORHOOD AND AS MENTIONED, WE'RE LOOKING TO REPLACE THE ORIGINAL METAL CHAINING FENCE AND CONTINUE IT TO THE FRONT OF OUR HOME WITH A METAL CATTLE PANEL FENCE.
UH, WHEN FIRST MOVING INTO OUR HOME.
THE CONDITION OF THE CHAINING FENCE WAS A KNOWN ISSUE DUE TO ITS BAD SHAPE.
IT WAS LEANING OVER, HAD MULTIPLE HOLES THAT HAD BEEN A, BASICALLY A SAFETY HAZARD TOWARD CHILDREN AND, AND, UH, SIDEWALK TRAFFIC, IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED WITH CAREFUL CONSIDERATION IN CONTINUING THE NEIGHBORHOOD STYLE AND CHARACTER.
WE CAME TO THE DECISION TO USE METAL CATTLE PANEL FENCING.
WE ATTACHED PHOTOS OF HOMES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT USE METAL FENCES.
THERE ARE PLENTY MORE EXAMPLES TO, UH, SINCE THERE'S SO MANY, UM, THIS IS WHERE WE GOT THE INSPIRATION FROM AND HAVE HAD GREAT FEEDBACK FROM OUR NEIGHBORS TO USE METAL FOR OUR FENCE.
THEY SAY IT LOOKS GREAT AND VERY HAPPY ABOUT IT.
UH, FOR THE FRONT SIDE OF OUR HOME, WE ARE GOING TO MEET THE CLEARVIEW HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AND HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE HEIGHT.
IN CONTRARY, WE'RE ALL ABOUT THE SAFE BEING OF OUR FAMILY AND ANYONE WHO DRIVES, WALKS, OR RIDES BY OUR HOME.
UM, WANTED TO MENTION THAT ON NOVEMBER OF 2019, WE WITNESSED A CAR ACCIDENT IN FRONT OF OUR HOME WHERE ONE OF THE VEHICLES DROVE ONTO A YARD.
UM, LABOR STREET IS A, UH, SUPER BUSY STREET.
I MEAN, UH, NOT ONLY CARS, BUT LIKE THE VIA BUS THEY DRIVE LIKE INSANELY FAST ON THAT STREET.
UM, SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, VERY PROBABLE LIKE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THOSE ACCIDENTS CAN REOCCUR.
UM, ALSO ON MAY 5TH OF THIS YEAR, ON MY WIFE'S BIRTHDAY, UH, WE WITNESSED A GRAPHIC SCENE OF A MAN, UM, ESCAPING ARREST, UM, AND WALKED ONTO HER BACKYARD BASICALLY AND RESISTED ARREST AND WAS PRETTY ROUGHED UP TO GET DETAINED THERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, UH, IN FRONT OF ALL OUR NEIGHBORS AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THINKING OF THESE RE RECENT INCIDENTS USING METAL POSTS FOR FENCING WOULD, WOULD HELP SLOW DOWN OR EVEN STOP A CAR, IS AN ACCIDENT WHERE TO HAPPEN TOWARDS THEIR HOME, GOD FORBID.
UM, BUT OVERALL, LIKE WE'RE LOOKING TO USE METAL FENCE TO CONTINUE THE CURRENT STYLE AND CHARACTER OF A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD AND PROTECT OUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS.
AND OF COURSE LAST A LIFETIME FOR OUR LACA HOME.
UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU MAY HAVE GOTTEN A LITTLE BIT AHEAD OF YOURSELF ON THE SIDE FENCE, BUT I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT NOT PARTICULARLY HAVING AN ISSUE ABOUT THE SIDE FENCE LAST TIME.
THE, THE FENCE THAT MOVES AROUND THE CORNER IN THE FRONT YARD, YOU'RE PROPOSING THAT THAT IS LIMITED TO THREE FEET IN HEIGHT, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT, YES.
AND I WANNA SPEAK TO THE MATERIALITY.
I THINK WE SPOKE ABOUT THAT LAST TIME, AS WELL AS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT SIDE YARD VERSUS FRONT YARD.
UM, I, I THINK THE, THE, THE FENCE HAS PROPOSED IS CONSISTENT WITH MANY OF THOSE FOUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I DON'T HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT FENCE, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE IT'S A FOOT, UH, LOWER THAN WE, WE WE COULD FIND THERE.
AND, UH, IT IS RELATIVELY MINIMAL IN THE VISUAL FIELD.
SO, UH, I SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S, UH, REQUEST FOR BOTH ITEMS ONE AND TWO.
I, UH, COMMISSIONER FISHER MUTED.
I DON'T KNOW WHY I HAVE SOUND ISSUES TODAY.
UH, WELL WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME WAS THAT BECAUSE OF THE HOUSE PLACEMENT ON THE CORNER, BUT ALSO LIKE HOW IT'S PLACED ON THE LOT? UM, I GUESS IT'S ALSO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY, UM, I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT THIS.
I DO WANNA ASK THE APPLICANT BE MUCH MORE AWARE OF PERMITS AND INSTALLATION.
I MEAN, IT IS A CORNER PROPERTY, SO ANYTHING YOU DO MORE IN THE FUTURE TO THE HOUSE, PLEASE MAKE SURE TO, TO COME OR TALK TO STAFF PRIOR.
UM, YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY IT WAS LIKE A MISCOMMUNICATION THERE.
UM, AND DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, WE, YOU KNOW, WE DEFINITELY WANNA DO EVERYTHING RIGHT.
UM, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS.
I, UM, TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.
I THINK COMMISSIONER FISH WAS MAKING A MOTION EARLIER.
I WISH YOU'RE TRYING TO, I GOT THE BUTTON.
UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE.
UH, AND ITEMS TWO, UH, AS SUBMITTED.
COMMISSIONER
MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE FISH? AYE.
[02:45:01]
QUEZ? AYE.[20-4495 Address/Description: 100 N SANTA ROSA HDRC Case No.: 2020-337 Applicant: Image360 San Antonio West Request: Signage City Council Dist.: 1]
CASE IS ITEM 23.UM, EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE? YES.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 23 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 23 37 100 NORTH SANTA ROSA.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE INSTALL AN INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN TO FEATURE INDIVIDUALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS AT THE CORNER OF WEST COMMERCE AND NORTH SANTA ROSA TO READ INSPIRE.
DOWNTOWN SIGN WILL FEATURE AN OVERALL WIDTH OF APPROXIMATELY 14 FEET AND OVERALL HEIGHT OF APPROXIMATELY 5.4 FEET FOR A TOTAL SIZE OF APPROXIMATELY 76 SQUARE FEET.
THE SIGN WILL FEATURE ALUMINUM CONSTRUCTION WITH POLYCARBONATE LETTERS TO INSTALL FOUR INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PARKING SIGNS TO FEATURE BLACK ALUMINUM FACES AND POLYCARBONATE LETTERS TO BE LOCATED AT THE CORNERS OF WEST COMMERCE AND NORTH LAREDO, WEST HOUSTON AND NORTH LAREDO, NORTH SANTA ROSA AND WEST HOUSTON, AND NORTH SANTA ROSA AND WEST COMMERCE.
PROPOSED SIGNS WILL FEATURE AN OVERALL SIZE FOR APPROXIMATELY 52 INCHES IN HEIGHT AND 30 INCHES IN WIDTH FOR A TOTAL SIZE OF APPROXIMATELY 21.5 SQUARE FEET, INCLUDING BOTH SIDES.
THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUESTED, EXCUSE ME, IN ITEM NUMBER THREE, INSTALL ONE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PARKING SIGN TO FEATURE BLACK ALUMINUM FACES AND POLYCARBONATE LETTERS TO BE LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF WEST COMMERCE IN NORTH LAREDO.
PROPOSED SIGN WILL FEATURE AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF 12 FEET AND AN OVERALL WIDTH OF THREE FEET, OR A TOTAL SIZE OF 72 SQUARE FEET, INCLUDING BOTH SIDES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH E WITH THE STIPULATION AT THE PARKING SIGN NOTED IN REQUEST.
ITEM NUMBER THREE, BE REDUCED IN SIZE TO MATCH THOSE NOTED REQUEST ITEM NUMBER TWO, APPROXIMATELY 52 INCHES IN HEIGHT AND 30 INCHES IN WIDTH FOR A TOTAL SIZE OF APPROXIMATELY 21.5 SQUARE FEET.
I DO WANT TO NOTE TO THE COMMISSION TO, UH, ADDRESS STAFF'S PREVIOUS OR TO ADDRESS STAFF'S COMMENTS THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED ON FRIDAY, UH, A REVISION OR AN OPTION B FOR THE LARGER PARKING SIGN.
THE ORIGINAL PARKING SIGN IS LOCATE LOCATED ON PAGE 12 OF THE APPLICATION.
THE OPTION B IS LOCATED ON PAGE 13 OF THE APPLICATION.
UH, AND I HAVE THE APPLICANT, UH, MR. SCOTT MILGRAM, UH, FROM IMAGE 360 WEST ON THE PHONE.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, UH, STAFF.
THANK YOU FOR REVIEWING EVERYTHING.
AND I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT WE, THAT MYSELF AND THE CLIENT HAD DISCUSSED WITH, UM, WITH CHANGING THE SIGN ON THE BACK ALLEY TO THE SMALLER SIZE, IT WOULD MAKE IT BASICALLY THE SAME SIZE AS THE FOUR SMALL DIRECTIONALS AROUND THE, AROUND THE PROPERTY.
AND OUR CONCERN WAS NOT HAVING THAT PARKING, FULL PARKING SIGN ENTRANCE LOOK AND ALLOWING THE VISIBILITY ON THE BACK ALLEY.
UM, WE DID OFFER A REDUCTION IN THE SIZE TO A 30 BY ONE 20 VERSUS THE 36 BY 1 44, WHICH BROUGHT THE, THE LETTERING ON THE P AND PARKING DOWN TO AROUND 10 INCHES.
AND WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WOULD STILL GIVE US GOOD VISIBILITY FOR POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC PARKING.
THIS PARKING GARAGE IS BEING OPENED FOR PUBLIC PARKING NOW, BEFORE IT WAS PERMIT PARKING ONLY, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO AID IN PEOPLE FINDING THE, THE PUBLIC PARKING AND MAKING PARKING EASIER FOR NOT ONLY RESIDENTS, BUT FUTURE RESIDENTS AS WELL.
UH, BEFORE WE GET INTO QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS, UH, WE HAVE, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UM, THE FIRST COMES FROM STEVEN ARNOLD, 100 NORTH SANTA ROSA, UH, BASED ON U D C SECTION 35 6 7 8 NUMBER AND SIZE OF SIGNS THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT CAN APPLY FOR UP TO THREE SIGNS.
THIS REQUEST IS FOR FIVE, NUMBER ONE IS OKAY, NUMBER TWO WITH FOUR SIGNS AT EACH CORNER OF BLOCK IS EXCESS.
NUMBER THREE IS A LARGER, IS A SECOND LARGER SIGN AT THE CORNER WITH ONE AND NUMBER TWO, NUMBER THREE SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.
AND NUMBER TWO SHOULD BE REDUCED TO TWO SIGNS ON STREETS WITH ENTRANCE TO PARKING AREA, NOT ON SANTA ROSA, WHICH HAS ZERO ACCESS TO THE PARKING AREA.
LOCATION IS WITHIN SEVERAL HISTORICAL AREAS.
MILAM PARK, SAN PEDRO CREEK, MARKET SQUARE.
ALAMEDA THEATER SIGNS SHOULD REFLECT THE HISTORICAL NATURE OF THIS AREA.
AND THE LAST COMMENT COMES FROM CARROLL WOOD.
UM, THE ANA BUILT BY ED CROSS WAS DESIGNED TO FIT INTO THE
[02:50:01]
HISTORIC CHARACTER OF DOWNTOWN SAN ANTONIO.THE NEW OWNERS ARE FROM CALIFORNIA, MAY NOT REALIZE THE VALUE WE PLACE ON PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF HISTORIC SAN ANTONIO.
ANA IS LOCATED ON NORTH SANTA ROSA BETWEEN HOUSTON AND COMMERCE STREETS, AND IN THE MIDST OF SEVERAL HISTORIC SITES.
IT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM MILAN PARK, CATTY CORNER FROM MARCUS SQUARE NEXT DOOR TO THE ELEVATOR THEATER, AND A BLOCK WEST OF THE SAN PEDRO CREEK CULTURAL PARK.
NEARLY A BLOCK NORTH OF THE O HENRY HOUSE AND TWO BLOCKS FROM CASA NOVARA.
LAST YEAR, THE CITY APPROVED PLANS FOR MAJOR UPGRADES TO COMMERCE STREET IN THIS AREA THAT INCLUDE WIDER SIDEWALKS, WAYFINDING SIGNS, UM, TREES FOR SHADE AND SEATING.
A HUGE PROPOSED 14 FOOT BY FIVE AND A HALF FOOT LIGHTED SIGN FOR THE CORNER OF COMMERCE STREET WITH THE WORD INSPIRE IS TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE HISTORIC AREA AND INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE UPCOMING COMMERCE STREET IMPROVEMENTS.
IT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN ANY FORM.
IT'S ESSENTIALLY A LIGHTED BILLBOARD.
THERE ARE ALSO PROPOSED SIGNS TO ADVERTISE PARKING.
YOU SHOULD ONLY BE APPROVED WITH CHANGES, SO THEY FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PARKING SIGN SHOULD BE SMALLER AND SHOULD BE ONLY, AND SHOULD ONLY BE RENDERED IN NEON AS ARE THE SIGNS IN NEARBY SHOPS AT MARKET SQUARE.
THE PROPOSED USE OF L E D IS UNACCEPTABLE.
WE NEED TO SAFEGUARD SAN ANTONIO'S UNIQUE HISTORIC CHARACTER AND BEAUTY AND PROTECT THE CITY FROM LOOKING LIKE ANY PLACE.
UH, THIS CHAIRMAN FETZER, UM, QUESTION FOR STAFF AND I GUESS THE APPLICANT AS WELL.
I DON'T SEE ANY BUILDING ELEVATIONS THAT MIGHT SHOW, UH, WHERE THESE SIGNS ARE LOCATED IN TERMS OF HEIGHT ABOVE THE SIDEWALKS, UH, WHERE ON THE FACADES, UH, WHAT, WHETHER THEY'RE PERPENDICULAR TO THE BUILDING, WHETHER THEY'RE ANGLE ANGLED TO THE BUILDING.
UM, AND I THINK FOR AN APPLICATION WITH THIS MANY SIGNS, UH, IT WOULD BE, UH, AT LEAST FOR MYSELF, IT'D BE HELPFUL TO HAVE, UH, BUILDING ELEVATIONS THAT SHOWED THESE LOCATIONS.
I HAVE THOSE RENDERINGS I DIDN'T FEEL AS I NEEDED TO SEND THOSE IN.
I CAN FORWARD THOSE TO EDWARD.
UH, WELL, UH, UH, MR. MILGRAM, UH, SIMILAR TO HOW I MENTIONED ON FRIDAY ABOUT US NEEDING TO GET EVERYTHING IN ON FRIDAY, THE THE SAME APPLIES, UM, COMMISSIONER FETZER.
UM, WE CAN GO TO, UM, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I CAN TRY TO WALK THROUGH IT AS BEST AS POSSIBLE.
UH, SO STARTING ON PAGE 11 IN THE APPLICATION PACKAGE, UM, ESSENTIALLY ALL OF THESE SIGNS, UH, BETWEEN BASED ON CONVERSATION WITH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT ARE INSTALLED, UH, AT, INSTALLED AT, AT THE, I GUESS THE TOP PLATE, YOU COULD SAY OF THE FIRST FLOOR.
UH, SO APPROXIMATELY 15 TO 18 OR 20 FEET ABOVE STREET LEVEL.
UM, THEY'RE EACH INSTALLED, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A, A MOUNTING SECTION, UM, THAT SHOWS HOW EACH SIGN WILL BE INSTALLED, UM, A ATTACHED TO THE FACADE OR PERPENDICULAR TO THE FACADE, UM, ON EACH, ON EACH ELEVATION.
AND THEN, UM, ON, ON PAGE 12, UM, HOW THE 12 AND 13, I SHOULD SAY, HOW THE LARGER SIGN WILL BE INSTALLED.
EDWARD, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT YOU COULD PULL UP A STU UH, GOOGLE STREET VIEW AND POINT OUT THESE LOCATIONS IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE THEY ARE? BECAUSE I, I SHARE COMMISSIONER FETZER'S CONCERN.
I CAN'T JUDGE THE SCALE OF THESE WITHOUT THE CONTEXT AND MAYBE POINTING OUT THE LOCATIONS CAN HELP.
UH, YES, UH, LAUREN HAS CONTROL OF THE COMPUTER RIGHT NOW, BUT I COULD PROBABLY TAKE CONTROL AND DO THAT FROM MY SIDE.
UM, LAUREN, IF YOU THINK THAT MAY BE EASIER, I
WHILE, UM, EDWARD'S PULLING THAT UP, UH, I DO WANNA MAKE, UM, SOME COMMENTS.
UM, I TEND TO AGREE WITH THE, UM, WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT THE NUMBER OF, NUMBER AND LOCATION OF, UH, SOME OF THESE PARKING SIGNS IS TOO MUCH FOR THE BUILDING, ESPECIALLY ALONG SANTA ROSA STREET.
UH, SINCE THERE'S NO ACCESS TO THE PARKING GARAGE EXCEPT, UH, ON, UH, LAREDO, UH, I COULD, UH, SEE A SIGN AT THE CORNER OF LAREDO AND HOUSTON AND LAREDO AND COMMERCE.
UM, BUT, UH, THE TWO CORNERS ON SANTA ROSA, UM, UH, I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF.
[02:55:01]
BEING SHARED NOW.UM, SO WE'LL START ON PAGE NINE.
THIS IS THE LARGE SIGN THAT NOTES IN FIRE DOWNTOWN.
UM, THAT SIGN WILL BE PLACED HERE IMMEDIATELY AT THE CORNER AS SHOWN.
AND THEN WE'LL WORK OUR WAY AROUND THE BUILDING, UH, HERE AT THE CORNER OF WEST COMMERCE IN NORTH LAREDO WILL BE ONE OF THE FOUR SIGNS, ONE OF THE SMALL SMALLER PARKING SIGNS HERE ON THE REAR SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.
UM, ON NORTH LAREDO, UM, IS THE PROPOSED LARGE PARKING SIGN HERE AT THE CORNER OF NORTH LAREDO.
AND WEST HOUSTON IS ANOTHER OF THE SMALL PARKING SIGNS THE CORNER OF, UH, NORTH SANTA ROSA, AS WELL AS, UH, THE CORNER OF NORTH SANTA ROSA.
AND, UH, WEST HOUSTON IS LARGE PARK IS ONE OF THE SMALLER PARKING SIGNS.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL SMALLER PARKING SIGN HERE AT THE CORNER OF WEST COMMERCE IN NORTH SANTA ROSA.
CAN THE APPLICANT JUST, AND I THINK I WAS JUST BECAUSE I WAS HAVING TECH ISSUES HERE, CAN THE APPLICANT JUST AGAIN, REPEAT THEY'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL THESE STIPULATIONS BUT NOT WANTING TO REDUCE THE SIGN, THE PARKING SIGN? IS THAT WHAT IT WAS? YES, MA'AM.
YEAH, IT WAS JUST A, THE CLIENT FELT THAT THE REDUCING THE SIZE OF THAT ONE ON THE BACK WOULD HINDER VISIBILITY ON THAT BACK ALLEYWAY, HOPING THE LARGER GO BLUE EARTH AGAIN AND LOOK AT THAT STREET BECAUSE AS I JUST SAW, I THINK THERE WERE SOME OTHER SIGNAGE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET WHERE THAT SIGN GOES.
ONE SECOND, I'M PULLING THAT UP NOW.
SO HERE'S THE, THE REAR ALLEY.
UM, THERE'S CURRENTLY NO ATTACHED SIGNAGE.
UM, THERE IS THIS EXISTING SIGNAGE, UH, THAT'S, UH, DIRECTIONAL PARKING, UH, FOR A TENANT.
AND THEN THERE'S INCIDENTAL SIGNAGE HERE ON THE REAR FACADE.
UH, BUT CURRENTLY THERE'S NO, UH, THERE'S NO BLADE SIGNS OR WALL SIGNS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THIS FACADE OF THE STRUCTURE.
AND WHERE WOULD IT EXACTLY BE UP A LITTLE FURTHER? WE WILL BE ON THAT LAST BRICK SECTION RIGHT BEFORE THE, THE OPENING FOR THE PARKING GARAGE.
YEAH, THE OTHER WAY EDWARD, SORRY.
IT'S RIGHT THERE TO THE RIGHT ON THAT BRICK FACADE TO, TO THE RIGHT OF THE OPENINGS OF THE PARKING GARAGE LEVELS.
HOW, HOW FAR AWAY FROM THE LARGE SIGN IS THE SMALL SIGN ON THE CORNER GONNA BE? BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S NOT MORE THAN 50 FEET.
THE SIGN ON THE CORNER IS ACTUALLY ON THE HOUSTON STREET SIDE AND NOT ON THIS SIDE, ON THE RADIO SIDE.
I SHARE SOME OF, UH, THE CHAIRMAN'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF THE PARKING SIGNS, PARTICULARLY THOSE ON THE CORNER CORNERS OF SANTA ROSA.
UH, A QUICK QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT WHILE I'M ON HERE.
IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE AGREED TO A REDUCTION IN THE SIZE AND THAT THE REVISED SIZE IS A LITTLE BIT SMALLER.
IT'S 30 BY 120 AND THIS IS THE LARGE PARKING SIGN? THAT'S CORRECT.
IT WAS THREE BY 12, SO IT WAS 44 SQUARE FEET AND WE REDUCED IT TO 30 SQUARE FEET.
THIS IS THE UPDATED SIGN WITH THE REDUCED SIZE, UH, ON THE SCREEN NOW.
SO, UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
I'M, I'M JUST GONNA REITERATE THE EARLIER, UH, COMMENT FROM THE CHAIRMAN THAT
[03:00:01]
WHILE WE SEE THESE SECTIONAL DETAILS AND WE'VE GOT DIMENSIONS ON THEM, I'M REALLY MISSING THE CONTEXT HERE AND TO SEE HOW THIS PLAYS IN THE RELATIVE, UH, SIZE OF THINGS.SO I, AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE A DRAWN, UH, ELEVATION, IT COULD BE JUST A PHOTO MONTAGE.
UH, SO MAYBE PUT THIS INTO CONTEXT FOR US.
IS THAT SOMETHING THE APPLICANT WOULD BE WILLING TO COME BACK SO WE JUST CAN MAYBE JUST GET THAT OUT.
I MEAN, GET IT APPROVED PRETTY QUICK, BUT THEN WE ALSO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH MOST COMMISSIONERS.
IS THAT HOW THEY FEEL? IS THAT SOMETHING THE APPLICANT COULD COME BACK WITH? ABSOLUTELY.
ACTUALLY, WELL THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH.
I WOULD FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE ABOUT APPROVING WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED IF I CAN SEE THOSE RENDERINGS.
SO I WOULD MOVE TO CONTINUE MR. CARPENTER.
MAY WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR CONTINUING? UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE.
[Approval of July 15, 2020, HDRC Meeting Minutes.]
[Approval of July 29, 2020, HDRC Meeting Minutes.]
WE HAVE TWO, UM, A C R C MEETING MINUTES JULY 15TH AND JULY 29TH.THIS IS COMMISSIONER APPROVAL OF THE JULY 15TH AND THE JULY 29TH MEETING MINUTES.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ I SECOND MOTION A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF THE JULY 15TH AND JULY 29TH MINUTES.
MOTION TO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.