Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:26]

REMINDER, ALL CALL IN USERS.

PLEASE MUTE YOUR PHONE UNTIL YOU'RE READY TO SPEAK.

THANK YOU.

I'M WAITING ONE MORE MINUTE HERE.

[CALL TO ORDER]

OKAY.

GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO THE AUGUST 23RD, 2021 MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.

UM, LET ME BRING THIS CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AND, UH, TAKE ROLL COMMISSIONER HIND SET.

ANISSA CASTILLO, NOT HERE YET.

UH, WIT FEATHERSTON.

THERE YOU ARE.

PLEASE, PLEASE INDICATE BY VOICE THAT YOU'RE, UH, THAT YOU'RE ON HERE.

SO IT'LL BE ON THE RECORDING AT LEAST.

KEVIN.

THANK YOU, KEVIN.

K FOR ALL OF ROCHE.

NOT YET.

UH, KELLY LITTLE.

THERE SHE IS.

TREY MCWHORTER HERE.

THANK YOU, BLAKE.

TO WHAT WILL NOT BE HERE, BETHEL AND SUELA HERE AND CAROLINE RIGHT HERE.

THANK YOU.

UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR CITIZEN COMMUNICATION? YES, WE HAVE TWO.

UM, THE FIRST IS REBECCA W OH, NEVERMIND.

NO, THERE IS NO CITIZEN COMMUNICATION.

MY APOLOGIES.

OKAY.

UM, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE WAITING TO SPEAK, WE WILL GO THROUGH THE AGENDA, UM, AND IDENTIFY ITEMS THAT ARE UP FOR DISCUSSION.

THOSE THAT ARE ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

IF THERE'S SOMETHING RED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO POLLED EITHER FROM THE COMMISSION OR, UM, SOMEONE ON THE LINE, PLEASE SAY SO, AND WE'LL PULL UP FOR DISCUSSION.

[Consent Agenda: 1A, B1, B4, B5, B6, B8, C6, C7, C8, C9, D3, D4]

WE HAVE SEVERAL ITEMS ON OUR CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AGENDA AND SEVERAL DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS.

THE FIRST ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

THAT'S UP FOR CONSENT.

SECOND PRESENTATION IS DISCUSSIONS AND POSSIBLE ACTION.

WE HAVE A PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION REGARDING TO, UM, NATIONAL REGISTER APPLICATIONS.

THAT'S A ONE ANDERSON STADIUM AND A TWO HOUSTON TILLOTSON COLLEGE, AND THAT'LL BE DISCUSSION.

UM, ITEM A ONE, THE REVEREND JOHN AND MADDIE BARKLEY HOUSE.

THAT WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM ITEM EIGHT TWO, UM, THE CHRYSLER AIR TEMP HOUSE AND THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM ITEM EIGHTH, 3 10, 6 21 BY IN YOUR FARMS DRIVE.

UM, EIGHT FOUR IS ALONG WITH THIS.

THESE ARE ON THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

THAT MEANS THE APPLICANTS HAVE CONSENTED TO POSTPONE THIS, AND WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE THOSE ON UNTIL THE MOVE IS COMPLETED.

AND, UM, AND THE PROPERTY, THE, UM, DECILE LUTHERAN CHURCHES UP, UH, FOR RECONSIDERATION AS A LANDMARK UNDER B DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS.

WE HAVE ITEM B ONE AT 1805 EAST THIRD STREET, THE HERRERA HOUSE THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THEY MET WITH THE R UM, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND SHOWED THE PLANS.

THE COMMITTEE FELT VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THEM.

AND SO IT'S OFFERED FOR CONSENT UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO PULL IT FOR

[00:05:01]

DISCUSSION ITEM B TO 200 LEE BARTON DRIVE IS ON THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT.

THAT'S THE PEGGY HOUSE ITEM B3 53 12 SHELL PREET BOULEVARD THAT IS OFFERED.

THAT'S THE CONE HOUSE IT'S OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM BEFORE 8 0 9 EAST NINTH STREET.

THE ROOTING ALVAREZ LOPEZ HOUSE IS OFFER RATE UP, OFFERED FOR CONSENT TO TEMPORARILY RELOCATE THE HOUSE TO PROTECT IT FROM A CASING CONSTRUCTION.

I WISH I COULD DO THAT WITH MY HOUSE.

ITEM B FIVE.

THAT ELIZABETH NAME IS DAN.

THAT'S ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT SHARE WITH MYERS ON THAT ONE.

I'M YOUR OKAY COMMISSIONER HAIM.

SETH IS ABSTAINING ON ITEM FIVE, 300 FORTIES 44TH, ELIZABETH NAMED MUSEUM ITEM B 6 44 0 9 AVENUE C IS A PROPOSAL TO REPLACE WINDOWS.

THAT'S OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM B SEVEN WILL NOT BE HEARD BY US TONIGHT.

IT'S BEEN APPROVED BY STAFF.

THERE'S NO ACTION TO BE TAKEN.

ITEM B 8 39 0 9 AVENUE G IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

UM, THAT IS THE FLANAGAN HYDROGEN HOUSE.

THEY WERE ASKING TO REPLACE THEIR, UM, THEIR ROOF WITH A METAL ROOF AND INSTALLED SOLAR PANELS.

THEY MET WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

UM, THEY WERE WELL THAT IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE, UH, TO CHANGE THE, UM, TO CHANGE THE ROOFING MATERIAL.

AND THEY WERE GIVEN PERMISSION TO ADD SOLAR PANELS TO THE GARAGE AND TO THE NOT UNVISIBLE NONVISIBLE SIDE OF THE ROOF UNDER C DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS IN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS ITEM, SEEING ONE WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, BUT IT WILL BE A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ITEM C 2 25 21.

JARED AVENUE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL ITEM C3 ASSIGN AT 10 0 9.

WESTLAND STREET IS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ITEM C FOR 1104 20TH STREET.

AND THE CLARKSVILLE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

MADAM CHAIR, UH, A COUPLE OF UPDATES ON THOSE ITEMS, 1009 WESTLAND.

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT WE DISCUSS THE CASE TONIGHT AND STAFF IS AMENABLE TO THAT.

SO WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT A DISCUSSION ITEM.

OKAY.

THAT WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

THAT IS ITEM C3, UH, THE REQUEST FOR SIGN, UM, FOR 10 0 9 WESTLAND AND THERE WAS ANOTHER, UH, CORRECTION.

YES.

ITEM C4.

UH, LIKEWISE, WE HAVE A REQUEST FROM MARY REED TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM SO WE COULD TAKE THAT UP AS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

UM, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

OKAY.

I S I'M SORRY, I COULDN'T READ MY OWN NOTES.

SO THAT WILL BE A DISCUSSION POSTPONE MAP.

OKAY.

I DON'T SEE, I'LL BE ABSTAINING FROM THE 1009 WESTLAND.

OKAY.

PLEASE TAKE NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON WILL BE RECUSING HIMSELF ON THAT AGENDA ITEM C3, AND WE HAVE ANISSA KOSTIA COMMISSIONER CASTILLO IS PRESENT NOW ITEM C 5 11 0 4.

CHARLOTTE STREET IS A CONSENT POSTPONE BACK TO THE SEPTEMBER 27TH MEETING.

THAT'S IN THE CLARKSVILLE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT ITEM C 6 15 0 4.

HARTFORD ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL ITEM C 7 17 10.

MOLLY DRIVE IS ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM C 8 15, 10 ASHWOOD ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM C 9 82 SAN MARCUS STREET IN THE WOOL SPENCE DISTRICT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE A, UH, A REQUEST ON THAT ONE.

WE RECEIVED NOTICE TODAY FROM A NEIGHBOR OF THIS PROPERTY THAT SHE DID NOT RECEIVE A NOTIFICATION IN THE MAIL.

I HAVE VERIFIED BY LOOKING IN OUR SYSTEM THAT IN FACT, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A VERY, VERY CLOSE PROPERTY, 2 82 SAN MARCUS,

[00:10:01]

THAT HER ADDRESS WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE NOTIFICATIONS THAT WERE MAILED.

SO THERE IS A REQUEST FROM HER AND OTHER NEIGHBORS TO POSTPONE THIS, TO ALLOW STAFF TO DO THE PROPER NOTIFICATION FOR THIS CASE.

OKAY.

UM, DO WE NEED TO PUT THAT ON THAT POSTPONEMENT AGENDA? YES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

THANK YOU.

JUST TO KIND OF SET POSTPONEMENT OR IT WOULD NEED TO BE A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

I'M SORRY.

YES, IT WOULD BE ONE.

WELL, UH, MADAM CHAIR, QUICK QUESTION TO STAFF.

UH, IF IT, IF THERE WAS, IF IT'S THEN, UM, CONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS NOT PROPER NOTIFICATION, THEN WE REALLY CAN'T PROCEED.

ISN'T THAT RIGHT.

SO IT'S NOT A DISCUSSION ITEM, BUT IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN LOOKING PROPERLY, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT IT WASN'T PROPERLY NOTIFIED.

SO W WE SHOULD TREAT IT AS IF IT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA.

IS THAT CORRECT? USUALLY BEEN THE CASE, UNLESS THIS WAS AN EXCEPTION FOR SOME REASON.

I DON'T KNOW IF STEVE IS ON THE LINE AND WANTS TO WEIGH IN, UM, SINCE IT'S POSTED ON THE AGENDA.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE COMMISSION NEEDS TO TAKE ACTION TO POSTPONE.

YEAH.

THE, THE FLIP SIDE IS, IS THAT, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM PAST, UH, NOTIFICATION PROBLEMS IS THAT WE ACTUALLY COULDN'T TAKE, UH, ACTION IF IT WASN'T PROPERLY NOTIFIED.

I DON'T RECALL HAVING THIS COME UP BEFORE IN A COMMISSION MEETING, BUT, UM, YEAH, IT MAY BE BACK FROM THE BACK FROM THE OLD, OLD DAYS THAT I'M STILL REMEMBERING THIS POLICY MAY HAVE CHANGED.

OKAY.

LET'S SEE IF WE CAN, UH, GET STEVE, CAN WE GO ONTO THE NEXT, UH, ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND COME BACK TO THIS TO DETERMINE IF, WHAT AGENDA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED UNDER IF AT ALL ELIZABETH? YES.

OKAY.

OKAY.

WE'LL RETURN TO ITEM C NINE UNDER D DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION OR RELOCATION ITEM E ONE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

POSTPONE THAT TO THE SEPTEMBER MEETING AT, AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.

OKAY.

I AM D 2 37 0 3 MEADOWBANK DRIVE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM ITEM D 3 3400 HILL VIEW ROAD IS OUT FROM, FOR CONSENT ITEM D FOR 800 WEST 12TH STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D 5 43 15 AVENUE A ON OUR AGENDA IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, BUT I WISH TO PULL THAT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION.

THANK YOU.

ITEM D 6 25 0 1.

INWOOD PLACE IS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

WE HAVE NEW ITEMS OR DISCUSSION OR ACTION ON CASES OF DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT AND NO ITEMS UNDER F DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE APPLICATE.

UH, ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR TAX ABATEMENT.

WE DO HAVE SOME COMMISSIONING STAFF ITEMS AT THE END OF THE AGENDA, AND WE'LL HAVE A MESSAGE FROM THE STAFF ON, UH, LEGISLATION THAT WILL AFFECT HISTORIC ZONING.

I WANT TO TELL ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE LINE.

NOW, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A VOTE ON OUR, UM, ON THESE ITEMS. IF YOUR ITEM PASSES ON CONSENT, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO STAY ON THE LINE.

UH, IT, IT MEANS YOUR APPLICATION WASN'T APPROVED, BUT IF IT'S APPROVED AND STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED THAT CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKET BE PREPARED, YOU HAVE TO TAKE, UM, EIGHT BY 10 PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL FACADES AND WRITE A NARRATIVE HISTORY OF THE BUILDING AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED THERE FOR ARCHIVING AT THE AUSTIN HISTORY CENTER.

SO IF YOUR ITEM IS APPROVED, UM, IF THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY STAFF, UM, OFTENTIMES IT'S TO RECONSIDER, UH, DEMOLITION, UH, CONSIDER RELOCATION OF, OR, UM, OR MAKING AN ADDITION, PLEASE LOOK CAREFULLY AT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT.

OKAY.

SO ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE HAVE THE MINUTES B ONE, B3, B FOUR, B FIVE, B SIX E EIGHT, C TWO,

[00:15:01]

C6 C7, C EIGHT, C NINE D THREE AND D FOUR.

IS THAT WHAT Y'ALL HAVE? YES.

COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA, C NINE AS A DISCUSSION, MADAM CHAIR, UH, ITEM C NINE IS THE CASE THAT WAS NOT THE, THE NEIGHBOR WAS NOT, NOT, NOT PROPERLY NOTIFIED.

UM, SO ARE WE TAKING IT OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA? IS THAT GOING TO BE DISCUSSION? WE'RE NOT, I DIDN'T LOOK AT THE ADDRESS OF, WE'RE NOT TAKING THAT UP RIGHT NOW, UNLESS AS ANY S STEVE, UH, WEIGHED IN ON THIS.

NOT YET.

I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT IT IS NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

I'M GOING TO MAKE AN EXECUTIVE DECISION NOW AND SAY THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE UP THIS ITEM ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT.

IN ANY CASE, WE ARE GOING TO WAIT FOR IT TO BE PROPERLY NOTIFIED FOR THE RESIDENTS TO BE PROPERLY NOTIFIED AND RETURNED TO OUR AGENDA.

YEAH.

MA MADAM CHAIR, THAT DON'T REQUIRE US TO TAKE POSTPONE THAT AS AN ACTION, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE IT OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

OKAY.

WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST WE DO WITH THAT? WELL, AT THE VERY LEAST, IF WE DON'T HAVE A BETTER, REALLY, I THINK IT PROBABLY BEHOOVES US AND WE COULD STILL KEEP IT AS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT AND THEN MAKE THAT CLEARER WHEN WE MAKE OUR DECISION.

BUT I WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT WE NOT TAKE THE CASE IF IT'S, UH, UNCERTAIN, UM, WHETHER IT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT AND WAIT.

AND IF IT MEANS LEAD, THEY POSTPONEMENT IS THE ACTION THAT WOULD STILL BE APPROPRIATE.

IN ANY CASE, IT'S NO LONGER ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA GOING HERE, HERE, A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

ONE LESS, UH, SORRY.

MADAM CHAIR.

ONE LAST THING.

ELIZABETH IS ON THE LINE WITH, UM, LEGAL TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THIS EITHER.

OKAY, WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

DO I HEAR A MOTION COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA.

SECOND, SECOND, SECOND FROM TREY MCWHORTER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE SAY, AYE, RAISE YOUR HAND.

YOU CAN RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY, AYE.

OKAY.

IT PASSES BY UNANIMOUSLY MEMBERS PRESENT.

OKAY.

ITEM D FIVE ARE GOING TO BE DISCUSSION ITEMS. AND

[Postponed Items: A3, A4, B2, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, D1, D6 ]

ON THE CONSENT POSTPONE MAC, WE HAVE THE TWO ITEMS, A THREE AND A FOUR REGARDING THE MOVE OF THE DESALLE LOSER LUTHERAN CHURCH TO PIONEER FARMS, BJ THE PEGGY HOUSE, C 5 1104, CHARLOTTE, AND EIGHT, 12 WEST 12TH STREET.

THIS IS CONSENT POSTPONEMENT.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AGENDA? SO MOVED COMMISSIONER COOK MOVED.

DO I HEAR A SECOND COMMIT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER LITTLE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENTS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

IT'S UNANIMOUS.

THAT AGENDA PASSES.

SO ALL OF THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE JUST READ WILL BE POSTPONED, UM, A THREE AND A FOUR WILL BE POSTPONED, UM, AS NEEDED.

AND THE OTHER ITEMS WILL BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE SEPTEMBER 27TH MEETING.

NOW WE'RE BACK TO THE DISCUSSION.

POSTPONEMENT.

HAS THERE BEEN ANY RESOLUTION ON C NINE MADAM CHAIR? WE'RE TRYING TO GET STEVE ON THE LINE.

HE'S HAVING SOME ISSUES GETTING THROUGH.

HE WILL WEIGH IN AND JUST A MOMENT.

YES.

AND MADAM CHAIR, HE MENTIONED ANOTHER ISSUE WITH SOMETHING THAT PASSED ON CONSENT.

SO IF WE CAN JUST GO ON HOLD FOR A MOMENT UNTIL WE CAN GET STEVE ON, I HATE TO KEEP BARRELING FORWARD AT THIS POINT.

THIS IS CITY HALL AB STEVE, CAN YOU HEAR US? I CAN HEAR YOU, BUT I CAN'T.

YOU GOT Y'ALL CAN'T HEAR ME.

I CAN HEAR YOU.

WE HEARD YOU.

WE'VE GOT YOUR STEVE.

OH, YOU CAN HEAR ME.

YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.

WONDERFUL.

UH, IT IS THE CASE ON JARED.

[00:20:01]

THE PLANS CAME IN LATE FRIDAY AFTERNOON AND THEY'RE NOT COMPLETE.

SO WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND ON THAT IS THAT WE DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION PRODUCT, BUT WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE.

UM, UH, AND THE CLAIMS ARE NOT COMPLETE.

SO I WOULD RECOMMEND POSTPONEMENT FOR THE PLAN FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION UNTIL NEXT MONTH.

OKAY.

UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO, WE WOULD HAVE TO, I THINK, YEAH.

AND THE CONSENT MOTION FOR THAT PARTICULAR CASE AND AMENDMENT.

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR YOU, STEVE.

WE WOULD NEED TO SEND THE MOTION.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO RESEND THE MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? WELL, WOULD YOU DO IS YOU'D MEET, WE'D BE RESENDING ITEMS C TO THE JARED AVENUE, UM, CASE THAT WAS, WAS ADDED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SO WE'D BE RESCINDING AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND STEVE, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO RESEND THE WHOLE CONSENT AGENDA AND START AGAIN.

WE JUST TAKE THAT ONE ITEM, SINGLE IT OUT AND SAY IT WAS CALLED OFF BASICALLY RESCIND THAT, THAT APPROVAL.

YES.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO RESEND A CONSENT OR APPROVAL FOR C2 25, 21 JARRETT SOMEBODY MAKE MOTION.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

I'M SAD.

A SECOND COMMISSIONER BORDER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF RESENDING CONSENT APPROVAL FOR C2, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

OKAY.

IT PASSES.

SO NOW WE NEED A NEW MOTION, A NEW MOTION ON THAT TO, UH, APPROVE THE DEMOLITION IF THE DOG SO DESIRE ON CONSENT AND POSTPONE REVIEW OF THE BUILDING PLANS UNTIL NEXT MONTH, MAN CHAIR.

YES.

I MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT, UM, STEVE, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST POSTPONE THE WHOLE THING AND, UH, WE CAN ADD THAT TO OUR CONSENT POSTPONEMENT.

OKAY.

I CAN'T, WE'VE NOW TAKEN, WE'VE NOW REACHED HERE WITH IT, BUT THE COMMISSIONER BALANCE OIL IS, IS THAT RIGHT? YES.

COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA.

DO WE HAVE APPROVAL FROM THE APPLICANT TO, UH, DO A CONSENT POSTPONEMENT ON THE ENTIRE PACKAGE? OR DO WE NEED TO HAVE THIS AS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, POSTPONEMENT? INSTEAD, WE CERTAINLY COULD DISCUSS IT.

I THOUGHT IT WOULD, WOULD BE PRETTY OBVIOUS THAT IF THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO COMPLETE PLANS AND THEY DIDN'T THAT WE COULD PICK IT UP LATER.

I INITIALLY THINK COMMISSIONER VILLAINS, WAIT A LOT.

I THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE MOVED TO THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

UM, SINCE THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REQUESTED A POSTPONE BACK, I'M JUST THINKING IF, IF THEY WANT TO GO AHEAD AND I GUESS THEY CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH DEMOLITION UNTIL WE REVIEW THE PLANS.

CORRECT.

THAT'S OUR USUAL ORDER OF BUSINESS.

OKAY.

JUST WONDERING WITH THE APPLICANTS, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

BECAUSE WERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL.

OKAY.

IS THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE? YEAH, THIS IS JOSHUA HOGAN.

OKAY.

WE'RE DISCUSSING WHETHER TO MOVE THIS ITEM TO THE CONSENT, THOSE PAWN MAT THAT WOULD BE WITH YOUR CONSENT.

AND IT WOULD BE HEARD, UH, AT THE SEPTEMBER 27TH MEETING OR TWO DISCUSSION POSTPONE MET, UH, IN WHICH CASE WE WOULD DISCUSS POSTPONING THIS AND, UM, TAKE IT UP THEN WHEN IT GETS TO THAT POINT ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL YOU CAN SEND US PHONING THIS CASE.

I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE DEMOLITION APPROVED, BUT I GUESS I UNDERSTAND WHY, LIKE, WE DON'T HAVE THE BILL.

WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAN FINALIZED BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T SUBMITTED FOR THE ACTUAL BUILDING PERMIT YET.

SOME, A LITTLE CONFUSED WHY WE NEED TO HAVE THE PLANS FINALIZED FOR THE DEMOLITION.

YOUR PLANS NEED TO BE REVIEWED BEFORE YOU CAN RECEIVE, UH,

[00:25:01]

A DEMOLITION PERMIT.

OKAY.

AND WE SUBMITTED, I GUESS, PLANS AND ELEVATIONS LATE ON FRIDAY.

UM, AND THEY WEREN'T, THE AGENDA, UH, WAS ALREADY POSTED.

OKAY.

YES.

COMMISSIONERS.

WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE IF I, IF I MAY MADAM CHAIR.

SO THE APPLICANT IS NOT NECESSARILY SAID HE AGREES TO A POSTPONEMENT SHOULD GO BACK TO OUR REGULAR ORDER, COMPLETE THE, THOSE POSTPONEMENTS, THAT OUR CONSENT, AND THEN TAKE THIS UP IN THE PROPER ORDER WITH DISCUSSION POSTPONE.

OKAY.

SO IT WILL NOT BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

WE'RE GONNA, WE DO WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE TO MOVE IT TO THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT AGENDA? NO, WE DO NOT.

MADAM CHAIR.

YEAH.

OKAY.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE IT TO THE, TO THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

SO ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WE HAVE, DID WE VOTE? WE VOTED ON THAT.

THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT DID.

WE CAN SET THOSE POMA OKAY.

YEAH.

THE DISCUSSION I'M CONFUSED.

YOU WERE RIGHT.

WE WE'RE RIGHT THERE.

THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT STARTS, RIGHT? IT DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

WE HAVE C1 WATERSTON C3, UH, 1,009 WEST LINN AND INWOOD.

AND NOW C NINE, I'M SORRY.

UM, JARED AVENUE, C 2 25, 21 JARRETT.

I, I HAD C4 AS WELL.

IS THAT CORRECT? C4 20TH.

I, UH, I ASKED TO PULL THAT OR IT'S ON OUR DISCUSSION AGENDA.

OH, I THOUGHT IT WAS DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

OKAY.

UM, MR. UM, OH, YOU'RE RIGHT.

THAT I'M SHARING THE SIGN ON WETLAND CHANNEL NINE WEST LANE.

THAT'S GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION ITEM TONIGHT.

NOT A POSTPONEMENT.

IT'S GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

YEAH.

YEAH.

I THINK WE, I THINK WE SAID THAT, THAT THAT'S ON MINE.

I HAVE THAT ON MY NOTES.

I THINK WE GOT THAT.

OKAY.

YEAH.

JUST A SECOND WHILE I GATHERED THIS, SO C4 1104 TOYA, I THINK THIS WAS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

UM, THIS IS, THIS SHOULD BE ON THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

SO THE DISCUSSION POSTPONE THAT IS C1, WATERSTON C4, 1,104 IT'S B TO B 6 25 0 1.

ENWOOD.

AND I HAD TO SEE TWO AS WELL.

IS THAT RIGHT? OH YEAH.

JARED.

WE JUST HAD THAT ONE.

THAT'S RIGHT.

THAT WAS THE REASON.

SAY TO JARED, DO I HEAR A MOTION? NO, NO.

WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS EACH ONE OF THESE.

WE'LL JUST, WE DON'T NEED A MOTION TO TAKE IT OFF.

WE JUST, IF IT'S NEXT ON THE AGENDA.

SO WE JUST TAKE THEM IN ORDER.

OKAY.

REALLY WELL, BECAUSE REMEMBER, WE'RE NOT HEARING THE CASE.

WE'RE ONLY HEARING THE EFFICACY OF THE POSTPONEMENT.

WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO WOULD PREFER IT, NOT TO BE POSTPONED AND SOME WHO THINK IT SHOULDN'T BE POSTPONED AND IT'S UP TO US TO MAKE SURE.

WELL, YEAH, WE HAVE TAKEN THE DISCUSSION POSTPONE ITEMS UP AS THEY APPEAR IN THE ORDER ON OUR AGENDA.

SO WE'RE ON THE C1.

WE HAVE TO HAVE THE PEOPLE SPEAK.

OH YES.

BUT ONLY ADDRESSING WHETHER OR NOT THEY AGREE TO POSTPONE AND IF NOT, WHY? OKAY.

IS THERE, IS THERE ANYONE ON THE LINE RIGHT NOW? LET ME, LET ME JUST GET THIS STRAIGHT.

THERE HAVE BEEN MORE CHANGES IN THIS AGENDA.

HOLD ON.

YEAH.

OKAY.

ON OUR AGENDA, WE HAVE C ONE.

IS THERE SOMEONE ON THE LINE TO SPEAK TO THAT? UM, NOT TO THE CASE, BUT TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS CAN BE, UH, THIS SHOULD BE POSTPONED.

YES.

MADAM CHAIR.

WE HAVE A MS. MARY REED WHO REQUESTED THE POSTPONEMENT.

OKAY.

MS. REED, ARE YOU ON

[00:30:01]

THE LINE? VERY REED.

OKAY, MARY, AGAIN, WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD, UH, UH, POSTPONE THIS.

YES.

AND I'M GOING TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT FOR WHY IT SHOULD BE POSTPONED.

OKAY.

I'M ASKING AGAIN THAT YOU POSTPONE RELEASE OF THE DEMO PERMIT TO THE CONTRIBUTING HOUSE LOCATED AT EIGHT GENERAL FIVE WATERSTON IN THE CLARKSVILLE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.

AS I'VE EXPLAINED PREVIOUSLY, OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, WE HAVE MET WITH JESSE NOL OF CUSTOM HOMES.

UH, WE MET WITH HIM FIRST ON JUNE 3RD, JUNE 3RD.

WE KNEW THE ODDS OF CONVINCING HIM NOT TO DEMO THE HOME WHERE JUST MORE SO WE FOCUSED ON SUGGESTING CHANGES TO HIS PLANS THAT WOULD MAKE THE NEW HOME LESS SUBURBAN, MORE CLARKSVILLE.

IN FACT, WE ASKED HIM TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE VERY SAME ISSUES THAT KALYN CONTRARES LATER POINTED OUT IN HER STACK REPORT.

SINCE OUR FIRST REPORT, FIRST OF MEETINGS, WE HAVE COMMUNICATED REGULARLY WITH JESSE AND ALL OF HIS STAFF.

AND THEN WE'RE TOLD REPEATEDLY THAT NEW PLANTS WILL BE FORTHCOMING SOON.

HOWEVER, THE PLANS THAT YOU NOW HAVE ARE THE SAME ONES WE SAW ON JUNE 3RD, MORE THAN TWO MONTHS AGO, NOTHING HAS CHANGED EVEN.

SO THE MEMBERS OF THE CCDC BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE OPTIMIST, MAYBE NAIVELY.

AND SO WE WANT TO BELIEVE THAT MR. NOL TRULY INTENDS TO DO WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD DO, AND JUST NEEDS MORE TIME POSTPONING A DECISION ON THE REQUEST FOR A DEMO PERMIT FOR 1805 WATERSTON WOULD GIVE HIM AND HIS STAFF YET ANOTHER CHANCE TO JOHN TO DESIGN SOMETHING THAT RESPECTS CLARKSVILLE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

IS THERE ANY ONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON THIS? NO MEDICAL AFFAIRS ITEM.

THE APPLICANT IS NOT ON THE LINE.

NO.

OKAY.

UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THIS CASE? IF THIS WAS POSTPONE PRIOR, I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

MADAM CHAIR.

UM, ARE WE RUNNING UP AGAINST ANY DEADLINES? I, WE DISCUSSED THAT TODAY.

WE'RE NOT RUNNING UP AGAINST A DEADLINE RIGHT NOW, AND WE DID HAVE SIX.

WE HAVE 180 DAYS FOR PROPERTIES THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING IN A NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.

SO WE COULD THEORETICALLY POSTPONE IT AGAIN.

DO I HEAR A MOTION? I THINK THE, THE CLARKSVILLE, UM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COURT, UM, REALLY WANTS TO SPEAK WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT, ABOUT THEIR DESIGN.

THEY JUST, UM, THEY'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THEY WOULD AND WOULD REVISE THE PLANS AND WE JUST WANT TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO COME TO THE TABLE.

I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE POSTPONING THAT CASE.

THE MISSION WAS THAT EMOTION SEPTEMBER MEETING.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A SECOND, SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER WRIGHT? ALL IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING IT TO THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

IT PASSES.

OKAY.

THE NEXT ITEM IS C3.

OH, NO.

WE MOVE C3 TO THE DIS DO WE MOVE C3 TO DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT OR DISCUSSION DISCUSSION? OKAY.

IT'S NOT ON THIS AGENDA.

I THINK WE OKAY.

SEE TOO.

WHERE DID IT GO? OKAY.

SEE TOO.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE ON THE LINE FOR SEAT TOO? YES.

MADAM CHAIR.

WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS ALL IN FAVOR.

UM, THE FIRST IS GOING TO BE JOSHUA HOGAN, THE APPLICANT.

OKAY.

THIS IS ALL WE'RE DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW IS WHETHER TO POSTPONE.

YES.

OKAY.

MR. HOGAN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

YEAH.

SO WHAT'S THE, UM, I GUESS WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE DEMOLITION APPROVED AND THE BUILDING PLANS REVIEWED ONCE WE SUBMIT FOR A BUILDING PERMIT.

CAUSE WE WERE ORIGINALLY ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BEFORE WE UNDERSTOOD IT.

OKAY.

UH, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER ON THE LINE HERE? WE HAVE MR. GREG MR. BREAST BREAST CAPICHE.

OKAY.

YES.

[00:35:01]

UM, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE, UH, I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, WE HAVE, UM, WE LIVE ACTUALLY THAT NEXT DOOR WE'VE BEEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OVER 18 YEARS.

UH, ALL OF OUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS SUPPORT THE DEMOLITION AND OUR PLANS FOR A NEW HOME.

UM, WE ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING A HOME COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND STREET.

ALL WE'RE DOING TONIGHT, ALL WE'RE DOING TONIGHT IS DISCUSSING WHETHER TO POSTPONE IT.

THAT, I MEAN, AT THIS MOMENT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.

I, I, I WANT TO, I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IT.

I'D LIKE TO NOT POSTPONE IT.

WE WERE POSTPONED LAST WEEK.

I MEAN, LAST, LAST MEETING.

AND I'D LIKE TO KIND OF GET THIS WITH THIS GOING.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER ON THE LINE, MS. KIM AT GRISCAVAGE OKAY.

MS. KIM.

YES.

GREGORY WISE.

I WISH NOT TO POSTPONE IT.

LIKE GREG SAID, WE WERE POSTPONED LAST MONTH AND WE WOULD LIKE TO, UM, GET APPROVED FOR THE DEMOLITION AND WE'LL TURN IN, UM, HEALTH PLANS TO YOU.

AND, UH, LIKE YOU SAID, WE'VE LIVED ON THE STREET NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPERTY FOR 19 YEARS.

SO, UM, WE WOULD NOT WANT, WE DO NOT WANT TO POSTPONE THE DEMOLITION.

THANK YOU.

BUT LIKE YOUR EMOTION ON THE CASE.

I THINK WE HAVE SEVERAL POSSIBILITIES.

WE COULD PERHAPS APPROVE THE DEMOLITION.

YES.

COMMISSIONER HANDSET, COMMISSIONER HAIM, SETH, QUICK QUESTION TO STAFF.

UM, IN THE BACKUP, IT WAS, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE UPDATED PLANS OR DID THAT W WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT IN UNDER SEATS BACKUP? THE BACKUP CONTAINS ELEVATIONS THAT WERE RECEIVED FRIDAY AFTERNOON.

SO AS SOON AS THE FULL SET IS RECEIVED, WE'LL PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND HAVE A RECOMMENDATION.

SO THE INTENT WOULD BE TO HAVE IT GO TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UM, AS WELL AS THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT PROJECT.

SO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW IS NOT NECESSARY, UH, BUT COMPLETE PLANS ARE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MATERIALS ARE GOING TO BE.

IT JUST DOESN'T COMPLY WITH IT.

SO WHY WAS ? UM, I'M NOT SURE WHY IT WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE COMPLETE PLANS AT THAT TIME.

UM, OKAY.

DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THIS CASE POSTPONE TO DISCUSS, TO PO TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION AND POSTPONE THE REVIEW OF THE PLANS UNTIL NEXT TIME? WHAT IS THE COMMISSION'S PLEASURE, UM, TO APPROACH THE DEMOLITION AND POSTPONE THE REVIEW OF PLANS? UH, THE, THE MOTION, A STAFF RECOMMENDATION NOTES THAT THE DEMOLITION IS PENDING REVIEW OF THE PLAN.

SO TO SEPARATE THOSE AND MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE, UH, STEPS REQUIRED FOR THE, THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.

AND IS THIS POSTPONE MET TO THE NEXT MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 27TH? YES.

COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA YOU SECOND.

OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, WHICH IS TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION TONIGHT, AND THEN, UH, POSTPONE THE REVIEW OF THE PLANS TILL THE NEXT MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 27TH.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

OKAY.

IF TINA ANIMUS, NOT AS PART OF A MOTION, BUT JUST AN INSTRUCTION THAT THE CITY WILL NOT RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT UNTIL THE COMMISSION HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE FULL SET OF PLANS.

YEAH.

I, UM, I STATED SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT EARLIER IN THIS DISCUSSION, BUT YEAH, YOU HAVE APPROVAL.

YOU WILL HAVE APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION, BUT WE STILL NEED TO REVIEW THE PLANS.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

AND ITEM D 6 25 0 1 INWOOD MAN CHAIR.

DID WE SKIP C4? C4 HAS BEEN MOVED TO DISCUSSION.

IT'S A REQUEST POSTPONEMENT BY A CITIZEN.

WE'RE STILL ON OUR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS.

AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS

[00:40:03]

YES.

MS. .

IS IT A STEPHAN POSTS? COMMENTS? OKAY.

C4 10 0 9 WEST LINN C4 IS 1104 20TH STREET.

HI, SORRY.

I HAVE, I HAVEN'T BEEN DRINKING BEFORE 1,104 TOYA'S STREET.

UH, THIS WAS, UM, THE, UM, WE HAVE SOMEONE ON THE LINE, MARY REED, I BELIEVE TO ADDRESS THIS.

YES, DO THERE.

YES.

GO AHEAD.

YEAH.

SO I'M MARRIED, I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE CARCERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.

AGAIN, WE WOULD LIKE TO DELAY THE RELEASE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR 1104 TOYA.

SO THE APPLICANT PARODIES, THE HOMES CAN RETHINK ITS PLANS AND DESIGN A HOME THAT WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH CLARKSVILLE PARODIES.

THE HOME SEEMS TO HAVE COMPLETELY IGNORED THE ARCHITECTURE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND ASSUME THAT THE KIND OF HOME IT FEELS IN THE MORE SUBURBAN NEIGHBORS WHERE TYPICALLY WORKS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND CLARKSVILLE.

YES.

I THINK WE'RE JUST, WE'RE JUST TAKING UP WHETHER OR NOT TO POSTPONE THIS.

SO YOU'RE, YOU WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE SO THAT YOU CAN MEET WITH, UH, THE ISA.

YEAH.

OKAY.

YEAH.

IS THERE, IS THERE ANYONE WHY WE WANTED TO POSTPONE, BUT WE WANT TO POSTPONE.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? YES, WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER.

MS. OLIVIA ROULEZ AGAIN, MS. RUTH.

YEAH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MY NAME IS OLIVIA RUI AND I AM THE SUPPORT OF MARY REED.

I REQUEST TO POSTPONE.

AND SO WE CAN HAVE MORE TIME TO DISCUSS, I WOULD PAIR DCO.

I THINK THEY HAVE A HOME THAT IS ABSOLUTELY INCOMPATIBLE WITH THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, PARTICULARLY THIS BLOCK.

AND THEY SEEM TO BE OPEN TO MAYBE COMING BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND WORKING WITH US.

THANK YOU.

I THINK THAT'S THE END OF OUR SPEAKERS.

UM, COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE A MOTION ON THE CASE? WE HAVE NOT SEEN THIS BEFORE.

IT HAS NOT BEEN POSTPONED BEFORE.

UM, AS I WAS SPEAKING WITH STAFF EARLIER, UH, WE'RE LOSING CALEXICO AND I THINK I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS, UH, TO GIVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGAIN, UH, A CHANCE AT MEETING WITH, UM, THE BUILDERS ON A LESS ENORMOUS DESIGN.

YES.

COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT.

WE POSTPONE THIS CASE TO THE SEPTEMBER MEETING AND ENCOURAGE THAT WITH KENT TO ATTEND THE NEXT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

LITTLE SETTLED, SETTLED THE MOTION.

SECOND, THE MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.

THAT'S PAWN.

OKAY.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED ONE COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON IS OPPOSED.

UM, OKAY.

WE HAVE EIGHT IN FAVOR AND ONE OPPOSED THIS ISN'T A DENIAL OF AN APPLICATION.

THIS IS JUST A POSTPONEMENT.

WHAT IS OUR, UM, WHAT IS OUR BAR FOR APPROVING THIS MOTION STAFF? WHAT? SHOULDN'T ONLY BE A MAJORITY HERE.

OKAY.

NOW I'LL CALL IT THIS MOTION PASSED.

IT WILL BE POSTPONED TO THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, BUT WE, UH, AS WE NEED TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW MEETING COMMITTEE.

OKAY.

AND THE SIX C NINE MADAM CHAIR WE HAVE HEARD FROM, UH, BOTH STEVE SEDOWSKY AND THE LAW DEPARTMENT WHO AGREE THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD TAKE ACTION TO POSTPONE THIS CASE, TO ALLOW STAFF TO ENSURE PROPER NOTICE IS PROVIDED TO NEIGHBOR AND DINERS.

AND THIS IS, UH, 82 SAN MARCUS.

THAT'S GREAT.

OKAY.

AND THE LAW DEPARTMENT SAYS WE SHOULD POSTPONE IT OR TAKE ANY ACTION, NOT TAKE ACTION.

THE LAW DEPARTMENT WOULD PREFER THAT WE POSTPONE SINCE IT IS POSTED ON THE AGENDA.

OKAY.

MADAM CHAIR, I'LL MOVE THE POSTPONEMENT UNTIL THE SEPTEMBER AGENDA.

OKAY.

SECOND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIND, SETH.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER PHELAN.

SUELA DOESN'T SECOND.

IT, I

[00:45:01]

BELIEVE WE NEED TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT IN ANY ONE ELSE FIRST, BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE, IS THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE? WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER IS, UH, MR. JIM WHITLAM.

I DON'T BELIEVE HE'S THE APPLICANT.

OKAY.

MR. WILLIS, CAN YOU ADDRESS THE LINE? I'VE I'VE BEEN, I'VE BEEN, UH, NOTICE I'VE BEEN NOTICED AS THE APPLICANT, WE HAVE THAT IN WRITING.

SO THE ONLY THING THAT I'D LIKE TO SAY IS MISTAKES DO HAPPEN.

I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT NOTIFICATION NEEDS TO BE CORRECT AND COMPLETE.

SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE, TO THE POSTPONEMENT.

I JUST DO WANT TO SAY THIS FOR SOMEBODY THAT HAS THIS PROPERTY UNDER CONTRACT, THIS POSTPONEMENT IS COSTING HIM THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN, UH, INTEREST COSTS AND, UH, ADDITIONAL TAXES ON A PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, JUST GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND, YOU KNOW, THIS SORT OF THING COMES UP.

IT HAPPENS.

BUT I, YOU KNOW, I TOLD HIM TO GO AHEAD AND START THE PROCESS OF PUTTING A PACKAGE TOGETHER, ASSUMING THAT YOU WILL GRANT THE, UH, THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.

I TOLD HIM TO START PUTTING THE PACKAGE TOGETHER NOW SAVE AS MUCH TIME AS HE CAN, BUT, UH, YEAH, WE'LL AGREE IF IT COULD BE, UH, IF IT COULD BE ON THE SEPTEMBER AGENDA, I GUESS WE'LL APPRECIATE THAT.

I THINK THAT, UM, I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO POSTPONE IT OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER HANDSETS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESTATE YOUR MOTION? OKAY.

WELL, THE SAME MOTION IS THAT WE WOULD, UH, POSTPONE UNTIL THE SEPTEMBER AGENDA AND, UH, DIRECT STAFF TO, UH, REMEDY THE NOTIFICATION AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

UH, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER DIFFICULTIES WITH THIS CASE.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A SECOND, SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MCWHORTER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING, IT IS RAISE YOUR HAND.

IT'S APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

OKAY.

MADAM CHAIR.

LET ME JUST SAY, UH, TO ADDRESS MR. WITLESS CONCERN, UH, UH, AS, AS MUCH AS, AS I WISH WE COULD DO, UH, YOU KNOW, WE COULD REMEDY THESE WITH THE SNAP OF A FINGERS, I GUESS WE'RE REALLY AN APOLOGY TO YOU ALL.

UM, NO FAULT OF YOUR OWN.

NOPE, NOTHING, UH, THAT WOULD IN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER PREJUDICE, THE CASE, UH, IT'S JUST UNFORTUNATE IN THIS SITUATION, WE WOULD NOT WANT TO TRY TO RUSH YOU THROUGH AND THEN FIND OUT THAT THE ACTION WE TOOK WAS IN FACT INVALID.

SO, UM, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING OUR JOB PROPERLY FOR YOU.

I CONCUR.

I THINK, I THINK THAT THAT COULD, UM, THAT MIGHT BE, UH, REALLY COME BACK TO BITE US.

UM, NOT JUST US, BUT THE APPLICANT.

I THINK WE NEED TO, UH, WE NEED TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND MAKE PROPER NOTIFICATION, SO, OKAY.

HOPEFULLY WE'VE GOT LIKE, I'LL DO THE AGENDA.

WE'LL GO BACK TO OUR, UH, DISCUSSION ITEMS THE FIRST UP.

UM, DO WE HAVE THE PRESENTATIONS ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER? YES.

COMMISSIONER, SORRY.

I, I STILL HAVE THE SIX AS A DISCUSSION POST MOMENT TO THAT CHANGE.

NO, IT'S OKAY.

I SCRATCHED OUT SO MANY THINGS ON, ON MY PAGE THAT I CAN'T READ IT ANYMORE.

D 6 25 0 1 INWOOD STAFF, UH, REQUEST, UM, THAT WE DISCUSS A POSTPONEMENT SO THAT THEY CAN FULLY EVALUATE, UM, THIS PROPERTY.

IS THERE ANY ONE TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE ON THE LINE? WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS.

THE FIRST IS MR. VINCENT HUBINGER.

OKAY.

IS HE THE APPLICANT? UH, NO, THAT WOULD BE LAURA BERKHART.

OKAY.

UM, MR. UH, TUBING, YOU'RE GO AHEAD AND, AND STATE YOUR CASE.

WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING WHETHER TO POSTPONE THIS CASE.

WE'RE HERE AT TONIGHT, BUT WE WOULD PREFER NOT TO POSTPONE.

OKAY.

UM, AND THE OTHER SPEAKER, MR. DANE WILKINS, WHO IS THE APPLICANT.

OKAY.

MR. WILKINS, ACTUALLY, MR. HEATING IS OUT.

SO THAT IS A, THAT IS ME, DAN, LOOK INTO VOICING THAT, AND I BELIEVE LAURA BERKHART IS ON HERE.

IF SO, UM, AND SHE SIGNED UP, DID SHE SIGN UP TO SPEAK? NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

SHE MIGHT JUST BE AUDIO.

WE CAN'T TAKE A SPEAKER WHO HASN'T SIGNED UP BY NOON YESTERDAY.

STAFF.

CAN YOU RECHECK AND MAKE SURE THAT SHE

[00:50:01]

ISN'T SIGNED UP? SHE IS NOT REGISTERED MADAM CHAIR.

OKAY.

OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

THEN.

UM, SHE'S UNABLE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS IT TONIGHT.

UH, COMMISSION.

OKAY.

CAN I HEAR FROM STAFF, UM, ANY DETAILS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE TIME TO CONSIDER? OKAY.

YEAH, A LOT OF CHAIRS.

THIS IS, UH, A VERY INTERESTING HOUSE.

UM, AND RESEARCH ON THIS HOUSE, UH, SHOWED THAT IT WAS, UM, IT WAS BUILT BY A COMPANY CALLED CLAN CON, UH, THAT WAS, UH, VERY INFLUENTIAL IN MODULAR HOUSES.

UM, SEVERAL HOUSES IN THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE ALSO HAD, UH, COMPONENTS MANUFACTURED BY PLAN CON.

AND I THINK THIS HOUSE HAS ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE.

IT ALSO HAS A HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT ENCOMPASSES EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW ABOUT THIS HOUSE.

OKAY.

DO YOU THINK YOU CAN BE THAT, UH, IN TIME FOR THE SEPTEMBER 27TH AGENDA? DEFINITELY.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONERS, UH, STAFF HAS REQUESTED, UM, A POSTPONEMENT SO THAT THEY CAN FULLY EVALUATE THIS PROPERTY, UM, ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION AND, UH, GET SOME ADDITIONAL HISTORICAL INFORMATION.

UH, DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE? WE'LL MOVE TO POSTPONE DOORS, SEPTEMBER 27TH MEETING AND STAFF REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION.

OKAY.

IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND FROM A COMMISSIONER? RIGHT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

OKAY.

IT'S UNANIMOUS.

IT'S POSTPONED TO THE SEPTEMBER 27TH AGENDA.

MADAM CHAIR, BEFORE WE MOVED TO THE, UH, THE BRIEFINGS ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF SOCRATES, THERE IS ONE MORE THING.

I, I REALLY APOLOGIZE FOR THIS ONE.

UM, ON ITEM B EIGHT, I JUST RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM THE APPLICANT.

UM, I HAD BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH HER SINCE THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AND HAD MISUNDERSTOOD THAT SHE WAS, UH, WILLING TO SELECT COMPOSITION SHINGLES.

SHE WOULD PREFER THAT THE FULL COMMISSION, UH, CONSIDER WHETHER A, UH, METAL ROOF IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LANDMARK.

UM, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO RESEND THE CONSENT APPROVAL OF ITEM B A 39 0 9 AVENUE G AND MAKE THAT A DISCUSSION CASE MISSIONERS? DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THIS CASE? THIS IS, UH, THIS IS A HISTORIC LANDMARK, UM, AN INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK AND THE, UM, THERE WAS JUST A MISUNDERSTANDING, UH, ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION.

I MOVED TO RETURN THE CONSENT APPROVAL FOR AN MBA 39 0 9 AVENUE G AND MOVE IT TO A DISCUSSION FOR THIS TONIGHT'S MEETING.

CAN I GET A SECOND COMMISSIONER, UM, FEATHERSTON SECONDS, THE MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF MOVING IT TO THE DISCUSSION AGENDA, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

OKAY.

IF IT'S UNANIMOUS, THAT PASSES THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED TONIGHT.

UM, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE EVERYTHING CORRECT ON THE DISCUSSION ITEM.

WE HAVE ITEM 81 ON BOWMAN AVENUE, ITEM EIGHT TO, UH, THE CHRYSLER BUILDING AND THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE.

UM, 37 0 4 METRO BANK, THE 5 43 15 AVENUE A AND WE'VE MOVED, UH, 10 0 9 WEST LYNN TO DISCUSSION AND 39, UH, B 8 39 0 9 AVENUE G.

LET ME JUST MAKE SURE THAT I GET, I'M GONNA PUT THAT IN A ORDER.

AND CAN WE GO AHEAD WITH OUR PRESENTATIONS? UH, ALSO MADAM CHAIR, C3 10 OR NINE WESTERLAND DISCUSSION ITEM.

I THOUGHT I SAID THAT 10 OR NINE WAS LED.

SORRY.

IT'S OKAY.

I MIGHT HAVE NOT SAID IT.

I MIGHT'VE SAID IT TONIGHT.

I'M NOT SURE

[00:55:02]

LET'S GO ON WITH THEIR PRESENTATIONS AND LET ME CATCH MY BREATH.

ALL RIGHT.

ARE WE PREPARED FOR SPEAKERS? OKAY.

YES, WE HAVE A FAIR, UM, AS PART OF OUR CLG REQUIREMENTS, UH, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REVIEWS, UH, NOMINATIONS TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.

SO WE HAVE TWO INDIVIDUAL NOMINATIONS TONIGHT UP FOR REVIEW AND POSSIBLE DISCUSSION, UH, BUT ALSO A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MAKE TO THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION.

SO, UH, WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, I'LL LET THOSE GO.

UM, WE ALSO, AS YOU'RE PROBABLY WELL AWARE WE HAD, THERE WAS A NOMINATION FOR THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

UH THAT'S BEFORE THE STATE BOARD REVIEW, IT'S BEEN SETTING POLICY NOT TO TAKE A POSITION ON HISTORIC DISTRICT NOMINATIONS, HOLDING ON A SINGLE PROPERTY ON INNOVATION.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE NOT EVERY PROPERTY OWNER HIT A HISTORIC DISTRICT ASSIGNED ONTO THE CREATION OF THE DISTRICT.

AND ONCE THE DISTRICT HAS CREATED POSSIBILITIES, ADDITIONAL THING, OR REVIEW OF PROJECTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT, UH, DELAYS BECAUSE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REVIEWED THOSE PROJECTS AND THAT IT WOULD BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR THE CITY TO NOT ENDORSE THAT WE WERE WRITTEN MINISTER THOSE ONCE THE, THOSE PROJECTS, ONCE THE DISTRICT IS CREATED, BUT WE HAVE NOT TAKEN A POSITION ON WHETHER A DISTRICT DISTRICT, THE NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT SHOULD BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

SO THE PRESENTATIONS THAT YOU'LL SEE TONIGHT ARE FOUR INDIVIDUAL NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATIONS, SINGLE, UH, SINGLE PROPERTY OWNER IS CONSENTING TO THE DESIGNATION.

AND IS THE, UM, IS THE PRESENTER READY TO GO? WE HAVE TWO BRIEFINGS TO START, UM, BRIEFING A ONE IS REBECCA DEBORAH, MOSCOW, I'M SORRY.

MADAM CHAIRMAN, STAFF COMMISSIONER HOME.

SETH.

YES.

UM, WE HAVE SIX CASES THAT WE'LL TAKE ACTION ON THAT SHOULD HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS IS OUR PROTOCOL IS STILL BEING, UH, ADMINISTERED WHERE BEFORE WE HAVE THE PRESENTATION WE ACTUALLY HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC STAFF, WOULD THAT BE THE TIME WE SHOULD HEAR THE, FROM THE PUBLIC? IS THAT STILL THE PROTOCOL THEY HAVE IN THE PAST? WE'VE AS A COURTESY, UM, HAVE, HAVE ALLOWED THESE PRESENTATIONS.

UM, BUT WE ARE TAKING ACTION ON THEM ARE ASKED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

UH, STEVE, DID YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN? YES.

YES.

THESE ARE BRIEFINGS TO THE COMMISSION, UH, WHICH GENERALLY DON'T HAVE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.

UH, DURING THE COURSE OF THE NOMINATION, THE STATE BOARD OF REVIEW HOLDS A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO PEOPLE WHO WANT TO WAIT IN THE PUBLIC, UH, WHO WANTS TO WEIGH IN ON THESE NOMINATIONS HAS AN OPPORTUNITY AT THAT POINT TO DO SO, BUT THIS IS REALLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMISSION TO, UH, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY.

I GUESS I WAS SAYING BEFORE WE GET OUR BRIEFING, WOULD WE HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC ON THE CASES, OR I GUESS WE'LL HEAR THE BRIEFING FIRST AND THEN GET HERE.

WE'VE DONE IT IN A COUPLE OF OTHER CASES WHERE WE HAD BRIEFINGS, UM, ALLOWED THEM TO GO BEFORE THE, UH, BEFORE THE, UM, PUBLIC HEARINGS.

IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING, MR. SEDOWSKY? YES.

OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

OKAY.

[2.A.1. Anderson Stadium (Yellow Jacket Stadium) – south of the intersection of Hargrave Ave., Rosewood Ave., and Thompson St. Council District 1]

ALL RIGHT.

OUR FIRST BRIEFING AGAIN IS MS. REBECCA, THE BRASCO GOOD EVENING.

UM, THANK YOU ALL FOR ALLOWING ME TO GIVE YOU THIS BRIEFING.

MY NAME IS REBECCA NEBRASKA.

I AM A HISTORIAN HERE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, AND I AM THE AUTHOR OF THE NOMINATION OF THE ANDERSON STADIUM KNOWN TODAY AS YELLOW JACKET STADIUM TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.

I WROTE THIS NOMINATION AS PART OF MY VOLUNTEER WORK AND ON BEHALF OF THE ORIGINAL LC ANDERSON ALUMNI ASSOCIATION, WHICH WAS FORMED TO TAKE CARE OF, YOU KNOW, BE A VOICE FOR THE ALUMNI OF THE LP ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL AND, UM, TO ADVOCATE

[01:00:01]

FOR THE PRESERVATION OF ITS HISTORIC PLACES, ITS HISTORIC ARTIFACTS AND ITS STORIES.

AS I HOPE, ALL OF, YOU KNOW, LP ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL, THE ORIGINAL ONE WAS, UM, AUSTIN'S ONLY PUBLIC AFRICAN-AMERICAN HIGH SCHOOL.

IT, UH, IT WAS ON THE EAST SIDE.

UM, IT CAME OUT OF EARLY, EARLY BLACK HIGH SCHOOL.

YOU KNOW, IT BECAME KNOWN AS LC ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL AND THE 1930S, THE YELLOW JACKET STADIUM OR ANDERSON STADIUM OPENED IN EIGHT IN 1953 AS PART OF THE THIRD AND THE LAST CAMPUS FOR LC ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL.

THE YELLOW JACKET STADIUM IS THE ONLY REMAINING PLACE ASSOCIATED WITH ELSIE ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL IN AUSTIN.

ALL OF THE OTHER SCHOOL BUILDINGS HAVE NOW BEEN DESTROYED EITHER THROUGH DEMOLITION, BY NEGLECT THROUGH ARSON OR IN THIS CASE, UM, THROUGH THE RECONSTRUCTION AND OPENING OF A NEW HIGH SCHOOL ON THE 1953 ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL SITE, EAST SIDE MEMORIAL AND INTERNATIONAL HIGH SCHOOLS, WHICH JUST OPENED THIS YEAR.

SO THIS STADIUM IS THE ONLY REMAINING HISTORIC PLACE IN EAST AUSTIN ASSOCIATED WITH THIS HIGH SCHOOL.

IN ADDITION, UM, I KNOW THAT RARITY ISN'T ALWAYS THE CASE FOR SIGNIFICANCE, BUT IN ADDITION, UM, IT WAS EXTREMELY RARE TO EVEN HAVE A BLACK PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL STADIUM.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF BLACK HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS HAD TO SHARE THEIR STADIUMS EITHER WITH THE WHITE PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL OR AS PART OF THE CITY STADIUM AND THEN HAD TO SCHEDULE THEIR GAMES, UM, AROUND THE WHITE HIGH SCHOOLS, UH, GANG, HOWEVER RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT MAYBE ONLY ABOUT THREE BLACK HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS HAD THEIR OWN STADIUM AND FURTHER RESEARCH ON MY PART HAS SHOWN THAT THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT STILL REMAINS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

SO FOR THAT REASON, WE ARE NOMINATING THIS TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, UM, FOR LOCAL SIGNIFICANT, AS WELL AS STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE IN THE, IN THE AREAS OF SPORT AND LEISURE AND AN ETHNIC HISTORY BLACK.

I WANTED TO TAKE MOST OF MY TIME IN BRIEFING YOU ABOUT THIS TO TALK ABOUT ONE OF THE MORE UNUSUAL ASPECTS OF THIS NOMINATION, WHICH IS THE INTEGRITY OF, UM, THE STADIUM, AS YOU'VE SEEN AS, UM, AS WE'RE SCROLLING THROUGH THE PICTURES, THERE WAS, UH, THERE WERE HUGE BLEACHERS THERE THAT HAD, THAT WERE ABLE TO SEE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THAT CAME TO SEE THESE GAMES TO SEE, UM, ELSIE ANDERSON PLAY.

THE YELLOW JACKET WERE HUGE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS IN BLACK FOOTBALL, THEY WON STATE CHAMPIONSHIPS AND WHEN THEY DIDN'T WIN, THEY STILL PLAYED IN STATE CHAMPIONSHIPS FOR A GOOD AMOUNT OF TIME.

AND, UM, SO IT WAS EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT, BUT THE STADIUM ITSELF, THE FACT THAT IT STILL REMAINS IS ACTUALLY KIND OF AN ASTONISHING FACT IN AND OF ITSELF.

THE STADIUM CLOSED.

UM, THE LAST GAME WAS PLAYED THERE IN 1966.

UM, WHEN THE UNIVERSITY INTER SCHOLASTICALLY, UH, INTEGRATED AND ALLOWED THE BLACK HIGH SCHOOLS TO BE PART OF THAT.

UM, AND THEN OUT THE ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL ITSELF CLOSED IN 1971 AS PART OF AIS PLAN TO INTEGRATE THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND THEN BUS HIS KIDS OUT TO THE OTHER HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE STATE, IN THE CITY IN 1982, THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE OPENED ITS FIRST CAMPUS AT THE LP ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL SITE.

AND AS PART OF ITS CAMPUS, IT DECIDED TO, UM, PAY THE YELLOW JACKET STADIUM, THE FIELD AND THE TRACK PAVED IT FOR PARKING FOR THE COMMUTER STUDENTS FOR THE NEW CAMPUS.

IN THE MEANTIME, THE BUILDINGS AND OTHER THINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THE STADIUM, AS WELL AS WITH THE SCHOOL CONTINUED TO DETERIORATE AISD, TO NOT PUT ANY MAINTENANCE INTO THIS SCHOOL OR INTO THE BUILDINGS AND ALLOWED AND ALLOWED FOR THE FIELD TO BE PAVED.

IT WASN'T UNTIL 1993, WHEN, UM, LED BY A FORMER NFL PLAYER, INFORMAL FORMER ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT HOLLYWOOD HENDERSON CAME BACK TO AUSTIN AND HE RECLAIMED THE STADIUM, ENTERED INTO A, AN AGREEMENT WITH AISC AND RESTORED THE FIELD, THE GRASS, AND THEN ULTIMATELY THE TRACK AROUND IT.

THE

[01:05:01]

STADIUM DOES NOT LOOK LIKE IT DID HISTORICALLY THE BLEACHERS ARE GONE, THE BLEACHERS WERE BUILT OUT OF WOOD AND METAL.

AND WHEN YOU COMPARE THE STADIUM TO WHAT THE WHITE STUDENTS HAD OVER IT, HOW PARKS, WHERE THE BLEACHERS WERE BILLED SUBSTANTIALLY AND WITH CONCRETE, THEY WERE MADE TO LAST VERSUS THE MATERIALS THAT WERE USED HERE IN THIS STADIUM WHERE THINGS WERE NOT MADE TO LAST, IT TELLS A STORY, DOESN'T IT? UM, SOME OF THE BUILDINGS ARE GONE AND THEY WERE REMOVED AT SOME POINT BETWEEN THE CLOSURE OF ANDERSON AND REALLY ACC MOVING IN IN 1982.

THE FACT THAT, UM, THIS STILL EXISTS AND THAT IT NO LONGER LOOKS THE SAME AS IT DID HISTORICALLY, THAT IT DOESN'T RETAIN SOME OF ITS INTEGRITY IS PART OF THE STORY OF ANDERSON STADIUM.

IT'S A DIFFERENT WAY OF LOOKING AT THESE HISTORIC PLACES.

AND THE LACK OF INTEGRITY SHOWS THE FACT THAT IT WAS NEVER BUILT TO BE AN EQUAL STADIUM TO THE WHITE SCHOOL IN THE FIRST PLACE THAT CONTINUED POLICIES ABOUT CLOSURES OF THE SCHOOL DISINVESTMENT AND INSTITUTIONAL DISCRIMINATION AFFECTED THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS AND THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS TODAY AND THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER AND TAKE THINGS INTO ACCOUNT FOR RESOURCES LIKE THIS.

LIKE AFRICAN-AMERICAN HISTORY, RESOURCES THAT MAYBE THE NOT HAVE THE SAME FUNDS AND SUPPORT AND RESOURCES AS THE WHITE SCHOOLS DID.

AND SO I'VE MADE THAT ARGUMENT ABOUT INTEGRITY THAT IT, IT DOES HAVE A LOT OF INTEGRITY, BUT SOME OF THE SUBSTANTIAL THINGS THAT ARE MISSING ARE ALSO PART OF THE STORY.

UM, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE, UM, THE OPTION TO GIVE A BRIEFING.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS I'D BE HAPPY TO, BUT I WAS ALSO, UM, YOU KNOW, REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT OF THE NOMINATION.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN, IN THAT ARGUMENT ABOUT INTEGRITY AND WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO YOU FURTHER ABOUT IT.

UM, OUTSIDE OF THE COMMISSION HEARING, I WOULD LOVE TO, BECAUSE THIS IS NOW I'M A DRUM I'M BEATING, SO I WOULD LOVE IT.

AND THE TULSA RACE MASSACRE OF 1921, RIGHT THIS VERY MINUTE.

UM, OKAY.

COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT, ABOUT THIS NOMINATION? I THINK WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

I WOULD STRONGLY, UM, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THIS NOMINATION TO THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION COMMISSIONER WRIGHT.

IS THAT A MOTION? YES.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HIND HINDSIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON IT? JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION.

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT STILL RETAINS OWNERSHIP.

UH, SO, UH, I WOULD ASSUME IT'S NEBRASKA THAT IN ADDITION TO ALL THE OTHER HOOPS YOU'VE JUMPED THROUGH, YOU'VE ALSO WORKED WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT VERY CLOSELY TO MAKE ALL THIS HAPPEN AND HOPEFULLY THERE'LL BE BETTER STEWARDS IN THE FUTURE.

YES.

AND YES, I HAVE WORKED WITH THEM THROUGH, ESPECIALLY THROUGH THE ADVOCACY OF THE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION.

THEY REALLY ADVOCATED FOR THIS LISTING PROCESS WITH AISD.

SO THEY ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE NOMINATION AND I'VE TRIED AS HARD AS POSSIBLE TO DRIVE HOME TO THEM.

UM, ABOUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IT AND THE IMPORTANCE OF, OF BEING BETTER STEWARDS.

THEY WANT TO, THEY HAVE, THEY'RE BUILDING ACTUALLY A NEW FIELD HOUSE AT THE SITE, UM, THAT YOU CAN SEE PICTURES OF IT IN THE NOMINATION.

IT'S PRETTY, UM, LOW PROFILE AND LOW IMPACT.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT CAN GET, YOU KNOW, THERE'LL BE BETTER BATHROOMS AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO BE ABLE TO USE THAT PROPERTY.

AND I WOULD HOPE WHEN SOMEDAY THEY DO DECIDE TO BUILD BLEACHERS, UM, BY VIRTUE OF THIS, HAVING A REGISTRATION THAT, UH, IT WOULD LIKELY COME BEFORE US AND WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO RESEARCH THEIR HISTORY AND POSSIBLY BE ABLE TO PUT BACK SOME OF WHAT WAS LOST BY NEGLECT COMMISSIONER COOK.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THE INTENT OF HIS, OF THE FUTURE USE, UH, BY THE DISTRICT WHEN IT'S A SITE WITH LOSS OF INTEGRITY, BUT WHAT WAS THERE, IF IT WERE A RESTORATION, YOU KNOW, TRADITIONAL RESTORATION, YOU'D BE PUTTING BACK SOMETHING THAT WAS POORLY CONSTRUCTED TO BEGIN WITH.

AND SO I'M INTERESTED IN HOW THAT'S GOING TO PLAY OUT IN PRACTICE WHEN, WHEN THEY DO MOVE FORWARD TO TRY TO INTERPRET SOMETHING WITH, WITH AN IMPROVEMENT, UH, WHEN IT'S, UH, POSSIBLY MORE LIKE, UH, UH, THE SITE

[01:10:01]

IS WHAT'S IMPORTANT LESS THAN WHAT WAS GONE, BECAUSE I'M ASSUMING YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE REPRODUCTION OF THE POOR QUALITY ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION, BUT RATHER MAYBE HONOR IT SOMEHOW.

OR THAT, THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE A COMPLICATION THAT THAT MAY BE DOWN THE ROAD FOR THEM, I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT, BUT IT DOES SEEM LIKE A COMPLICATION IN THIS, A UNIQUE APPROACH.

I THINK AT THIS, AT THIS JUNCTURE, WE'RE BEING ASKED TO RECOMMEND THE NOMINATION AS IT IS.

AND, AND INDEED, UM, IF IT IS LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER, IT WOULD COME BEFORE THAT, BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER.

AND WE MIGHT HAVE A CHANCE TO, UM, UH, TO DISCUSS, UH, ASPECTS OF, UM, A RECONSTRUCTION OR A, UM, OR A REPLICA, UM, OF SOMETHING THAT WAS THERE IN THE PAST.

UM, I, I HAVE THAT CASE RIGHT NOW IN MY NOMINATION FOR TULSA.

AND, UM, WE, WE HAD A CASE WHERE A PROPERTY WAS BOTH MOVED AND THE STRUCTURE WAS MOVED AND THEN WE HAD TO APPLY NEW BRAKE TO IT.

SO, UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, THAT THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE IS GIVING SOME LEEWAY ON, UM, FOR UNDERREPRESENTED, UH, COMMUNITIES.

YEAH.

I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS THAT.

I ENJOY HEARING ABOUT THIS NOMINATION.

I LOOK FORWARD TO READING IT.

I THINK AS PRESERVATION PROFESSIONALS, WE'VE BEEN TALKING FOR SEVERAL YEARS ABOUT THE LIMITATIONS OF HOW THIS WORK RESOURCES HAVE BEEN EVALUATED WHEN THEY'RE ASSOCIATED WITH UNDERREPRESENTED COMMUNITIES, THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN A LOT