Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:06]

UH, GOOD EVENING.

I'M BEN-HAIM, SATH THE VICE CHAIR OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.

UH, IT IS SIX O'CLOCK AND WE'RE CONVENING THIS MEETING ON NOVEMBER 15TH, 2021, UH, AT CITY HALL.

UH, THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING.

WE HAVE, UH, SIX MEMBERS HERE WITH ME ON THE DAYAS.

WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE A SEVENTH SOON.

UH, AND WE HAVE ONE MEMBER CURRENTLY, UH, VIRTUAL AND WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER JOINING US.

SO, UH, WE MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF QUORUM.

UH, LET ME BEGIN BY CALLING ROLL, UH, CHAIR, UH, CHAIR, TERRY MYERS.

OKAY.

WE SEE TERRY IS THERE.

UH, I AM HERE, UH, COMMISSIONER CASTILLO.

MR. CHRISTIE IS NOT ON THE DIOCESE.

UH, COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON WILL BE COMING AND JOINING US SHORTLY.

COMMISSIONER COOK HERE, COMMISSIONER LAROCHE HERE, COMMISSIONER LEVEL HERE.

COMMISSIONER MCWHORTER COMMISSIONER TO LET COMMISSIONER VALENS SUELA COMMISSIONER, RIGHT.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT IS ALSO ABSENT.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, THIS EVENING WE'LL BEGIN WITH CITIZENS COMMUNICATION IF THERE IS ANY.

AND I KNOW STAFF WAS JUST, UH, LOOKING, DO WE NOT HAVE ANY? OKAY.

SO THERE'S NO CITIZENS COMMUNICATION THIS EVENING.

WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL RUN THROUGH THE AGENDA AND WE WILL, UH, LOOK SPECIFICALLY AT APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA FIRST.

AND THEN WE WILL LOOK AT THE POSTPONED AGENDA, UH, BEFORE WE THEN PROCEED TO DISCUSSIONS AND THEN TAKE UP OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS IN CASES.

UH, THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES, UH, THAT IS BEING OFFERED AS A CONSENT ITEM.

UH, THAT WAS FOR THE OCTOBER 25TH, UH, MEETING.

AND, UH, I WILL LEAVE THAT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UH, THE SECOND, UH, ITEM ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA IS A PRESENTATION REGARDING THE NINE 16 CONGRESS AVENUE.

THAT'S ITEM TWO, A AND THAT IS A PRESENTATION.

NO ACTION WILL BE REQUIRED.

UH, THE NEXT ITEM, UH, FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS, UH, THIS IS, UH, ITEM A, UH, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC ZONINGS DISCUSSION ON ACTION OF APPLICATIONS FOR HIS, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT ZONINGS OR REQUEST TO CONSIDER INITIATION OF HISTORIC ZONING CASES.

WE HAVE A CASE, A ONE, WHICH IS THE 16, EXCUSE ME, 10 62 1 1 6 21 BY NEAR FARMS DRIVE, EXCUSE ME.

AND THAT IS A CONSENT, UH, POSTPONEMENT, UH, WITH THE OPPORTUNITY FOR AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, WE CAN DISCUSS THAT IN A BIT.

UH, WILL BE, UH, UH, 13 300 DESALLE ROAD, AGAIN, A CONSENT POSTPONEMENT, UH, WITH AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, UH, REQUEST ITEM, A THREE THAT IS, UH, 1601 CEDAR AVENUE.

UH, THAT ALSO IS, UH, POSTED FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

UH, THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT, BUT, UH, THIS IS A, UH, ACTION THAT WE MAY WISH TO DISCUSS.

SO I WILL ACTUALLY PULL THAT FOR A POSTPONEMENT DISCUSSION ITEM.

A FOUR WILL BE A DISCUSSION THAT'S 3 0 1 SAN JACINTO STREET.

WE GO ONTO ITEMS LISTED UNDER B THE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTIONS ON APPLICATIONS FOR CERTAIN CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS ITEM B 1 3 8, 10 DUVALL STREET THAT IS POSTED FOR DISCUSSION ITEM B B2 1600 GASTON AVENUE THAT IS POSTED FOR DISCUSSION ITEM B3.

THAT IS 8 0 7 BAYLOR STREET THAT, UH, HAS BEEN REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT TO DECEMBER 17TH.

UH, AND THAT WOULD BE A CON UH, CONSENT POSTPONEMENT ITEM C DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS WITHIN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS, UH, ITEM C ONE THAT IS 14, 11 ETHERIDGE AVENUE, UH, THAT IS POSTED FOR DISCUSSION.

IT WAS POSTPONED FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING, UH, TO THIS ONE.

UH, AND BY THE WAY, IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS, PLEASE INDICATE, UH, EITHER NOW OR WHEN I MAKE THE LAST REVIEW OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND WE'LL PULL THIS OFF OF THE AGENDA AND, AND HAVE IT FOR A PRESENTATION DISCUSSION, UH, OTHERWISE, UH, WE'LL REVIEW AND THE ACTION WHEN WE MAKE OUR VOTE ON THE, ON THESE, UH, CONSENT AND POSTPONE AGENDAS WILL BE FINAL ITEM C 2 15, 19

[00:05:01]

WEST 32ND STREET, UH, THAT IS ALSO POSTED FOR CONSENT ITEMS, C3 25 15 HARRIS BOULEVARD THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM 10, 12 SHELLEY AVENUE THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THAT C4 ITEMS C 5 15 0 8 WEST 29TH STREET THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM C 6 5 0 4 LELAND STREET THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, UH, ITEM C 7 5 14 TERRORISTS DRIVE THAT IS ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THE NEXT ARE ITEMS D UH, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION ITEM D ONE THAT'S EIGHT, 12 WEST 12TH STREET THAT A CONSENT POSTPONEMENT, UH, FOR AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

AGAIN, THAT WILL BE TAKEN UP.

UH, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT POSTPONEMENTS ITEM D TO 35 0 6 DUVALL STREET, UH, THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D 3 20 0 3 HAMILTON AVENUE THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D FOR 2,500 ROSEWOOD AVENUE, UH, THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D 5 24 12 VISTA LANE.

THAT IS EXCUSE ME.

THIS IS TELLING MINORS.

UM, THAT ITEM WAS IT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM, 2,500 GRIDS.

I MAY, I MADE THAT I JUMPED RIGHT THROUGH IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE CORRECTION.

THAT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM, D 4 2500 ROSEWOOD AVENUE ITEM D 5 24 12 VISTA LANE THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D 6 20 0 3 WILLOW STREET THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D SEVEN.

THAT IS TWO 11 WEST CANUCK LANE, UH, THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

AND I'M GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THAT, UH, JUST THAT WE ARE LOSING LOTS OF CHURCHES.

UH, I LOOKED AT THE CASE AND I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS WORTH, UH, OTHER ACTIONS FOR HISTORIC ZONING.

SO I WILL LEAVE THAT ON THE CONSENT ITEM, A CONSENT AGENDA, BUT IT IS NOTED ANOTHER CHURCH THAT IS BEING LOST, UH, ITEM D EIGHT, WHICH IS 1912 TILLISON AVENUE THAT IS BEING OFFERED AS CONSENT IN ITEM D 9, 10 0 7 CHECON STREET.

I THINK THAT'S POSTED ON CONSENT.

DID WE SAY THERE WAS, UH, AN INTEREST IN THAT ONE FOR DISCUSSION? EXCUSE ME.

NOW WE DO NOT HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THEN THAT WOULD BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UH, THE REMAINING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA WOULD BE E THE DISCUSSION AND ACTION OF DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT.

WE HAVE NO ITEMS IN THAT CATEGORY ITEMS, F DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR TAX ABATEMENT FOR REHABILITATION OF PROPERTY IN A LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.

UH, THESE ARE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TAX ABATEMENT AND ARE THEN ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE PROGRAM WITH OUR, WITH OUR APPROVAL.

THAT'S F1 6 0 7 OAKLAND AVENUE THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AND F 2 5 0 8 EAST MARY STREET THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

ALL RIGHT.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR ARE THERE ANY ITEMS TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION? WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE WHOLE AGENDA, MR. SETH, PLEASE.

THIS IS STEVE SADOWSKY.

UH, I THINK HE MAY HAVE MISSED MISSPOKE ON A, UH, POSTPONEMENT DATE.

THANK YOU SAID DECEMBER 17TH AND GOD HAS LEFT THE NEXT MEETING.

THE NEXT MEETING IS DECEMBER 17TH, FRIDAY AT FOUR O'CLOCK.

OH, IT IS.

OKAY.

SO YEAH.

AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT ABOUT SCHEDULE, BUT YES.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER.

UM, WE NORMALLY WOULD MEET ON MONDAY, BUT, UH, DUE TO SCHEDULING CONFLICTS, UH, OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE ON DECEMBER 17TH, WHICH IS A FRIDAY STAFF, I BELIEVE 4:00 PM.

IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, SO WE WE'LL SQUEEZE IT IN BEFORE CHRISTMAS, WHATEVER IT TAKES.

OKAY.

[Consent Agenda: 1A, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, D2, D3, D5, D6, D7, D8, D9, F1, & F2]

UH, LET ME GO QUICKLY THEN, UH, IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED OR POLLED, UH, I WILL READ, UM, THE CONSENT ITEMS FIRST AND THEN, UH, BE READY FOR EMOTION.

SO THE FIRST ITEM WOULD BE THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES.

THAT'S, UH, ITEM ONE A AND THE NEXT ITEM ON CONSENT WOULD BE, MAKE SURE I GET THESE RIGHT ITEMS. C TWO THAT'S 15, 19 WEST 32ND STREET

[00:10:01]

ITEMS. SEE 3 25, 15 HARRIS BOULEVARD ITEMS, C 4 10 12, SHELLY AVENUE, ITEM C 5 15 0 8 WEST 29TH STREET ITEMS, C 6, 5 0 4, LELAND STREET ITEM C 7 5 14 TERRORISTS DRIVE ITEM D 2 35 0 6, DUVALL ITEM D 3 20 0 3 HAMILTON AVENUE.

THE NEXT CONSENT ITEM IS ITEM D 5 24 12 VISTA LANE ITEM D 6 2 0 3 WILLOW STREET.

THE NEXT CONSENT WOULD BE ITEM D SEVEN.

THAT'S TWO 11 WEST CANUCK LANE, THE 8 19 12 TILSON AVENUE, D 9 1 0 0 7 CHACONNE STREET, UH, ITEM F 1 6 0 7 OAKLAND AVENUE ITEM F 2 5 0 8 EAST MARY STREET.

UH, THOSE ARE THOSE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA OFFERED CONSENT.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEMS. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY.

IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COOK.

UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA INDICATE BY SAYING AYE OR RAISING YOUR HAND.

UH, OKAY.

AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

OKAY.

UH, AND THEN JUST FOR ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, IF YOUR CASE WAS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, IT HAS NOW BEEN APPROVED AND ALL ACTIONS ARE COMPLETED ON THAT ITEM.

YOU MAY WATCH HIM CONTINUE IF YOU WISH, BUT, UH, YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO BE HERE,

[Postponed Items: 3A1, 3A2, 3B3, & D1]

THE NEXT ITEMS FOR OUR AGENDA OR THE POSTPONEMENT REQUESTS.

AND, UH, WE HAVE A NEW OPPORTUNITY FOR POSTPONEMENTS AND I'LL CALL UPON STAFF.

IF YOU WILL, TO EXPLAIN THE, UH, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, WHICH THE, AT LEAST THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION IS NOT MADE USE OF IN THE PAST.

YES, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

THIS IS ELIZABETH GROMMET WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE.

UM, THIS IS A POSTPONEMENT OPTION THAT I WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH AND I TAKE IT THAT THE COMMISSION HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY, UH, USED ON A ROUTINE BASIS, UH, FOR NOTIFICATION REASONS.

TYPICALLY THE PREFERENCE IS TO POSTPONE MEETING BY MEETING SO THAT THE NOTIFICATION THAT WAS MAILED FOR A CASE, UM, THAT GIVES THE MEETING DATES AND THE MEETING LOCATION IS THEN STILL CONSIDERED VALID SINCE THAT A MOTION TO POSTPONE WAS MADE IN A PUBLIC FORUM.

HOWEVER, WE HAVE A FEW CASES ON THE AGENDA WHERE THERE IS NO IMMINENT ACTION OCCURRING.

SO THOSE ARE ITEMS, A ONE AND EIGHT TWO, WHICH ARE RELATED TO THE RELOCATION OF THE DECILE LUTHERAN CHURCH TO PIONEER FARMS. UM, STAFF BELIEVES THAT IT WOULD BE EXPEDIENT TO TAKE THAT OFF THE AGENDA, GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT'S ALLOWED SINCE THE COMMISSION, UH, INITIATED THAT A ZONING CASE TO DEAL WITH THE MOVE.

WHEN THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WAS GRANTED FOR THAT PROJECT, UH, WE FEEL IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO MAIL NOTIFICATIONS FOR THAT PROJECT WHEN THE MOVE HAS OCCURRED, AND WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THAT ZONING CHANGE.

UH, WE ALSO WOULD LIKE TO AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM D 1 8 12 WEST 12TH STREET, UH, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SOME ADDITIONAL TIME FOR NEGOTIATIONS THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE UNDERWAY RELATED TO THAT PROPERTY.

AND SO AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, WE WOULD LIKE TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE TO TAKE IT OFF OF THE NEXT COUPLE OF AGENDAS WITH AN UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN THE APPLICANT IS READY FOR THAT CASE TO COME BACK, UH, ENOUGH AGAIN, ENOUGH TIME WILL HAVE ELAPSED SO THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO DO NOTIFICATIONS AGAIN, FOR THAT CASE, UM, FOR CASES ARE INDEFINITELY POSTPONED.

THEY NEED TO APPEAR AGAIN ON THE AGENDA WITHIN 180 DAYS.

AND THE ACTION COULD THEN AT THAT TIME, IF IT'S STILL UNRESOLVED SAY, SURELY THE CHURCH RELOCATION WILL NOT TAKE THAT LONG KNOCK ON WOOD, BUT IF THERE WERE A NEED FOR AN EXTENDED POSTPONEMENT, THE COMMISSION COULD TAKE THAT UP AT THAT TIME.

UH, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WILL BE ON STAFF TO KEEP TRACK OF.

WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE CARRY IT OVER A MONTH TO MONTH AND KEEP TRACK OF THAT 180 DAY WINDOW, UH, WHEN THAT NEEDS TO COME BACK OR SOONER IF, UH, THE APPLICANTS IN THOSE CASES ARE READY SOONER.

AND YES, CHAIR MYERS, I, OH, WHAT ABOUT CASE A 3 16 0 1 CEDAR AVENUE STAFF HAD, UM, DISCUSSED

[00:15:01]

WITH US LEAVING THAT AS AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT AS WELL.

YES.

AND THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED AND I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE DISCUSS THAT AND ITS APPROPRIATENESS AS A POSTPONEMENT ACTION, UH, AND MAKE THAT A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF REGARDING THIS, UH, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT? AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT, UH, AT ANY TIME, IF AN ACTION THAT AN APPLICANT MIGHT BE MAKING WHILE, UH, THEIR, THEIR CASE IS ON INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, IT WOULD STILL BE ALERTED.

THE STAFF WOULD STILL HAVE, UH, AN ALERT AND WE COULD PICK IT UP AT ANY TIME.

OKAY.

RIGHT, RIGHT.

UH, PARTICULARLY, UH, FOR , UH, THE DEMOLITION PERMIT WOULD NOT BE GRANTED DURING THAT PERIOD.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, SO IT'S NOT COUNTING, IT GETS THE CLOCK THAT OTHERWISE WOULD BE RUNNING ON THIS CASE.

OKAY.

AGAIN, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PERMIT.

APPRECIATE IT.

OKAY.

SO THAT BRINGS UP THE, UH, CONSENT POSTPONEMENTS.

AND, UH, THE FIRST ITEM IS ITEM A ONE AND THAT'S THE PIONEER FARM, UH, 1 0 6 21, UH, PIONEER FARMS DRIVE AND A TWO, UH, AND, UH, A HUNDRED AND THIRTY THREE ZERO ZERO DECILE ROAD.

UH, THE OTHER ONE IN THAT IT WOULD BE D ONE AND THAT IS THE EIGHT, 12 WEST 12TH STREET.

UH, THOSE THREE ARE OFFERED FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT AND THEN THE B3, THE 8 0 7 BAYLOR STREET IS OFFERED AS A CONSENT POSTPONEMENT FOR OUR NEXT MEETING, DECEMBER 17TH.

UH, DO I HEAR A MOTION? I'LL MOVE THOSE POSTPONEMENT ISLAND ITEMS AS NOTED COMMISSIONER COOK.

AND THE SECOND I'LL SECOND THAT COMMISSIONER MYERS.

ALL RIGHT.

CHAIRMAN, CHAIR, MEYERS.

UH, ALL RIGHT.

UH, WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

OKAY.

THANKS.

AND SAY, WHY NOT? IT'S UNANIMOUS.

OKAY.

SO LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION OF, AND THIS IS ONLY

[3.A.3. PR-2021-139064 – 1601 Cedar Ave. – Discussion Council District 1]

PERTAINING IN CASE TO THE ACTION WE ARE BEING RECOMMENDED, WHICH IS TO HAVE AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT ON THIS, THE 1601 CEDAR AVENUE.

UH, WE ARE AWARE THAT THE APPLICANT WITHDREW THE DEMOLITION REQUEST, WE INITIATED HISTORIC ZONING.

THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE ACTIONS.

AND SO WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE ACTION FOR US TO TAKE AT THIS TIME AND STAFF, YOU HAVE THAT AS A RECOMMENDATION.

YEAH.

SO STAFF CONSULTED WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT REGARDING A POTENTIAL ACTIONS THAT THE COMMISSION COULD TAKE TONIGHT, UH, REGARDING THIS, UH, WHAT WAS INITIALLY PUT ON THE AGENDA AS A DEMOLITION REQUEST.

THAT WAS WHAT PROMPTED THE COMMISSION TO INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING, WHAT THE LAW DEPARTMENT SUGGESTED WAS THAT THE COMMISSION AND DEFINITELY POSTPONED CONSIDERATION OF THIS CASE, UM, WHAT THAT WILL DO HAVE THE EFFECT OF DOING IS IT TO ALLOW THE CLOCK TO RUN OUT AND THE CASE WILL NO LONGER BE PENDING.

NORMALLY WE TRY TO AVOID THAT HAPPENING.

THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO HAPPEN WITHOUT MAKING THE CONSCIOUS DECISION TO, FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.

BUT IN THIS CASE, THERE, THERE IS NO DEMOLITION REQUESTS PENDING.

SO IT WILL NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF RELEASING A PERMIT BECAUSE THERE IS NO PERMIT APPLICATION PENDING.

UH, WHAT THAT WILL DO IS, UM, SIMPLY ALLOW THE CLOCK TO TIME OUT.

SO IF ANOTHER DEMOLITION REQUEST OR A PARTIAL DEMOLITION WERE TO COME FORWARD, STAFF WOULD SEE THAT AND WOULD AGAIN, BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO AGAIN, INITIATE AND RECOMMEND HISTORIC SETTING.

UH, I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TONIGHT, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS IS SPECIFICALLY A REQUEST TO, UM, THE REASON THE APPLICATION WAS WITHDRAWN IS IN THE INTEREST OF AVOIDING HISTORIC ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY.

UH, THE APPLICANT IS OPPOSED TO HISTORIC ZONING.

THEY ARE WILLING TO FORGO DEMOLITION IN ORDER TO AVOID HISTORIC ZONING.

AND SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO HONOR THE APPLICANTS, UH, WISHES AND NOT PURSUE A HISTORIC SIGNING CASE, UM, UNDER THE CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONERS IS ANY, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF REGARDING THIS POSTPONEMENT REQUEST? ONLY ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE ORIGINAL APPLICANT REGARDING THIS POSTPONEMENT ONLY, UM, MADAM CHAIR IS LOOKING TO BE, YES, UH, CHAIR MYERS, THIS CHAIR, HANDSET, UM, STAFF.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WOULDN'T PRECLUDE OUR INITIATION OF HISTORIC ZONING AT SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THAT ACTION STILL IS IN PLACE.

IT

[00:20:01]

IS STRICTLY IN A POSTPONEMENT MODE.

HOWEVER, IF NOTHING HAPPENS, UH, THAT WOULD WARRANT US TO PICK IT BACK UP AGAIN IN 180 DAYS, BY HAVING THE CLOCK RUN OUT, THEN WE BASICALLY GET A RESET IF I UNDERSTAND.

CORRECT.

RIGHT.

AND CERTAINLY THIS IS A CASE THAT WILL REMAIN ON STAFF'S RADAR.

IF AGAIN, IF ANOTHER PERMIT REQUESTS PERTAINING TO THIS PROPERTY COMES FORWARD, UM, I MEAN AN IDEAL SCENARIO WOULD BE, UM, PERHAPS WE HAVE A PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND ADDITION STUFF WITH EVALUATE THAT AS WE DO ANY CASE TO DETERMINE IF IT MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.

AND IF NOT, WE WOULD BRING IT BACK BEFORE THE COMMISSION AGAIN, FOR YOU TO CONSIDER WHETHER THERE'S A HISTORIC SENDING CASE TO CONSIDER.

OKAY.

OKAY.

AS COMMISSIONER COOK, I DID WANT TO CLARIFY THE PUBLIC HEARING NEEDS TO STAY OPEN DURING THAT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

IS THERE, ARE THERE ANY TIMING ISSUES WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THE INITIATION AND RECOMMENDATION PROCESS? IT WOULD BE FINE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AGAIN, WE ARE LOOKING TO LET THE TIME, UH, THE CLOCK RUN OUT SO THAT THE CASE IS NO LONGER PENDING.

IF ANOTHER APPLICATION COMES FORWARD AT ANY TIME, IT WILL COME BACK TO YOU.

AND IF THE CLOCK DID RUN OUT WITH THE INITIATION STILL STAND, OR WOULD THAT TERMINATE THE INITIATION PROCESS IN THE, WITH SOMEONE, ANOTHER COMMISSION OR US NEED TO REINITIATE IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN OR YES.

YES.

THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.

SO IT WOULD, IT WOULD GO BACK THROUGH WHEN THE CLOCK RUNS OUT, IT WILL RESET THIS CASE.

IT WILL NO LONGER BE A PENDING DESIGNATION.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF WE WERE TO RECEIVE A DEMOLITION PERMIT REQUEST, SOMETIME AFTER THE CLOCK RAN OUT, THE COMMISSION WOULD AGAIN, HAVE TO INITIATE AND THEN CONSIDER WHETHER TO RECOMMEND HISTORICALLY.

AND IS THERE ANY WAY TO GET ON THE RECORD, WHY THIS IS HAPPENING SO THAT A FUTURE COMMISSION WOULD KNOW THAT ACTION WAS NOT TAKEN SPECIFICALLY FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE? NOT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T CONSIDER IT WORTHY OF ACTING UPON, I BELIEVE THAT COULD BE PART OF YOUR EMOTION IF YOU WANTED IT TO BE RECORDED IN THE MINUTES THAT THIS IS AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT TO PRESERVE THE COMMISSION'S ABILITY TO CONSIDER HISTORIC STANDING AT A FUTURE TIME WITHOUT TAKING AN UP OR DOWN VOTE TONIGHT.

OKAY.

CAN I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION OF SAP? IF WE DO LEAVE THE, OR REOPEN, I GUESS WE LEFT IT OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, THAT WILL TIME OUT AFTER TWO WEEKS.

SO IT WON'T HAVE THAT 180 DAYS IF THE DECISION IS NOT MADE WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, CLOSING THEN, AND NO ACTION IS TAKEN, THEN THE CASE IS OVER AT THAT POINT.

SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE 180.

RIGHT.

AND, UM, THE END OF THE 180 DAYS IS REALLY, I THINK, IN THE INTEREST OF THOSE OTHER CASES, UM, THAT WE WILL NEED TO TAKE SOME ACTION TO BRING THOSE BACK.

UM, THE INTENT HERE IS REALLY DIFFERENT THAN THOSE OTHER INDEFINITE POST-TRAUMA ANTS.

THE INTENT IS TO RESOLVE IT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THE ISSUE OF POSTPONEMENT? UH, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION BASED ON OUR DISCUSSION HERE.

MEYERS CHAIR.

UH, YES.

UH, CHAIR MYERS.

I HAD AN, I WANTED TO ADD ONE THING TO THIS DISCUSSION.

IT'S NOT THAT WE INITIATED HISTORIC ZONING BECAUSE, UM, BECAUSE OF THE DEMOLITION REQUEST, IT WAS, IT WAS BASED ON THE MERITS OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF IN THE FACE OF POTENTIAL DEMOLITION.

JEREMIAH'S THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

UH, THAT IS, THAT IS MY RECOLLECTION AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, AGAIN, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION BASED ON OUR DISCUSSION.

I WISH I COULD STATE IT AS ELOQUENTLY AS MS. BRUMMETT JUST DID, BUT I, UH, MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONED THIS CASE, UH, IN THE INTEREST OF PRESERVING FUTURE ABILITY FOR THE COMMISSION TO RECONSIDER INITIATION OF HISTORIC ZONING.

UH, BUT GIVEN THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT, UH, AND THE OWNER'S WISHES, I WISH TO POSTPONE INDEFINITELY, UM, AS THE BEST RESOLUTION OF THE CASE AT THIS TIME.

OKAY.

I'LL SECOND THAT, RIGHT.

OH, THAT'S A MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER COOK SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LITTLE, UH, ANY DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND AND SAYING, HI, YOU GUYS BOTH.

AYE.

ALL RIGHT.

THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

OKAY.

SO THAT TAKES CARE OF ALL OF OUR, UM, POSTPONEMENT AND CONSENT ITEMS. AND NOW WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE REGULAR AGENDA.

[2.A. C14H-1982-0001-F – 916 Congress St. – Larmour, Jacob Block F update Presenters: Eric Tyler]

UH, THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PRESENTATION, UH, REGARDING NINE 16 CONGRESS, UH, THAT IS THE LAMAR JACOB BLOCK.

AND, UH, THERE IS AN UPDATE.

I AM, I'M NOT PREPARED TO ANY, ANY FORMAL PRESENTATION.

I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS WAS JUST GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION,

[00:25:01]

UM, WITH THE PANDEMIC.

UNCERTAINTY IS NOT REALLY GOOD.

PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

OH, ERIC TYLER, EXCUSE ME.

OKAY, GOOD.

9, 6, 2 NBA, NINE 16, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

OKAY.

AND THEN, AND AGAIN, JUST TO CLARIFY, YES, UH, MR. TYLER, THIS IS JUST A PRESENTATION.

WE ASKED YOU TO COME AND GIVE US INFORMATION.

YOU'RE NOT POSTED FOR ANY ACTION TONIGHT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UM, SO WITH, WITH THE PANDEMIC, THE UNCERTAINTY AROUND THE PAIN MIMICS NOT BEING CONDUCIVE TO LONG-TERM PLANNING.

SO WE'VE NOT PUSHED FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT ON THIS.

HOWEVER, THE FACADE AND THE WALLS, UH, OF THIS, UH, PROPERTY, THEY REMAIN, UH, STABLE AND THEY REMAIN, THEY CONTINUE TO BE SECURED BY BRACING EQUIPMENT.

THE EQUIPMENT'S ALL IN GOOD WORKING ORDER.

AND WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH POTENTIAL BUYERS AND PARTNERS ON A TWO TRACK PLANNED, EITHER SELL OR DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AND A JOINT VENTURE.

THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN OUR INTENTION.

WE WANT TO OCCUPY THE PROPERTY.

SO BASICALLY WHERE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S IN A SITTING POSITION RIGHT NOW.

OKAY.

MY UNDERSTANDING OF, BECAUSE I BELIEVE SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS WERE ASKING, UH, HAS THERE BEEN ANY ADDITION OR CHANGE TO THE SITE? HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING TO ADD OR WE HAVE NOT.

WE HAVE NOT.

THE PROPERTY REMAINS THE EXACT SAME SHAPE AS THE WESTBOUND, UM, COMMISSIONERS.

THERE WERE SOME REQUESTS TO HAVE THE OWNER HERE.

UH, YES.

COMMISSIONER COOK, THE SHORING EQUIPMENT.

IS THAT BEING INSPECTED? CAUSE THAT WAS INSTALLED AS A TEMPORARY SOLUTION, RIGHT.

THE BACKING SUPPORT FOR THE FACADE WAS THAT COMPLETED BEFORE THE PROJECT WAS STALLED OR IS IT ALL TEMPORARY SHORING AT THIS POINT? YES, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S THE SAME EQUIPMENT.

IT'S, IT'S ALL, IT'S IT ALL REMAINS INSTALLED, HAD INSPECTORS IT'S BEEN YEAR AND A HALF, TWO YEARS SINCE WE'VE HAD THE, UH, WE HAD A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER GO THROUGH AND INSPECT THAT.

PLUS WE HAD THE ACTUAL CONTRACTOR INSPECTED TO MAKE SURE IT'S ALL IN GOOD WORKING CONDITION.

ALSO WE, WE OFFICE RIGHT NEXT TO IT.

WE'RE, WE'RE NEIGHBORS, THAT MAIN TEAM.

AND, UH, WE PARKED THERE EVERY DAY AND WE CAN, WE CAN SEE THE WALLS FROM THE INSIDE AND FROM THE OUTSIDE AND EVERYTHING, THE THINGS IN GOOD SHAPE.

OKAY.

AND, UH, I DON'T THINK WE CAN DEMAND IT.

UM, I I'M JUST NERVOUS BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION ACROSS THE STREET WHERE WE BASICALLY HAD NO ROOF AND A FACADE.

AND WE WERE TOLD THAT THE CONDITION THAT THIS BUILDING EXIST IN NOW IS IMPOSSIBLE TO CREATE MUCH LESS MAINTAINED.

SO IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU COULD SUBMIT, UH, I WOULD JUST REQUEST THAT YOU SUBMIT TO THE PRESERVATION OFFICE, SOME PERIODIC REPORTS, WRITTEN REPORTS, CONFIRMING VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE, UH, SUPPORT, JUST TO ENSURE SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A DOCUMENTATION THAT EVERYTHING IS INTACT AND THAT THERE IS A RECORD FROM THE OWNER THAT EVERYTHING IS INTACT.

UH, AND AS FAR AS THE SH THE SHORING, UH, ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A REQUEST TO PENETRATE THE BUILDING AND HAVE A NUMBER OF TIE BACKS IN THE FACE OF THE BUILDING, WHICH WE REJECTED.

AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A PLAN TO BUILD A PERMANENT STEEL SUPPORT STRUCTURE IN THE BACK AND SUPPORT THE FACADE FROM THE REAR IN A NUMBER OF PLACES THAT WAS NEVER WAS THAT INSTALLED, OR IS IT SIMPLY THE TEMP, THE TEMPORARY TIE BACKS THAT ARE IN PLACE NOW? I WOULD HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT I BELIEVE IT WAS INSTALLED, BUT I'M NOT WONDERING OKAY.

IF HE COULD CONFIRM THAT.

AND DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE WINDOWS ARE RIGHT NOW? UH, THE, THE WINDOWS THERE'S WINDOWS INSTALLED.

I THINK THERE WAS A WINDOW THAT WAS MISSING.

UM, IT'S, IT'S GONE.

I, OKAY.

SO YOU THINK THAT WHEN THE WINDOWS ARE ALL, I THOUGHT I SAW, UH, A, UH, AN EMPTY OPENING, BUT I WAS ACROSS THE STREET, SO I'D BE HAPPY TO CONFIRM THAT THEY CAN CONFIRM THAT.

AND THEN THE BRICKS, ORIGINAL BRICKS ALONG THE TOP OF THE CORNERS, THERE'S A NUMBER OF THOSE MISSING, IF WE CAN CONFIRM WHERE THOSE ARE.

AND IF, IF POSSIBLY THOSE COULD BE PUT BACK IN PLACE FOR, AT VERY LEAST TO HAVE THE APPEARANCE, UH, OF, UH, COMPLETE AND SOLID, UH, WE, WE DON'T WANT ANY APPEARANCE THAT IT'S IN RUIN OR APPROACHING RUIN, SO THAT IN THE FUTURE, ANYONE CAN CLAIM THAT IT'S IRREVERSIBLY DAMAGED.

THAT'S, THAT'S MY MAIN CONCERN CHAIRMAN.

UH, YES.

UH, JEREMIAH, UH, I'D LIKE TO ASK, UM, COMMISSIONER COOK IF BY REGULAR INSPECTION OR, UM, OR VISUAL INSPECTION THAT WOULD BE, UM, BY THE ARCHITECT OF RECORD OR A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, UM, OR SOMEONE, UM, QUALIFIED TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.

UH, YES, DEFINITELY.

THAT WOULD BE IDEAL TO HAVE SOMEONE LICENSED IN, UH, ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION THAT IT'S STABLE AND IN GOOD CONDITION AND REPORT, REPORT BACK TO US, UH, PERIODICALLY THAT THAT'S STILL THE CASE.

OKAY.

I'LL, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL HAVE TO MEET IN INTERNALLY WITH OUR MANAGEMENT TO MAKE

[00:30:01]

SURE THEY'RE OKAY WITH IT, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE A REASONABLE REQUEST.

OKAY.

YEAH.

I MEAN, I COULD GO AND LOOK AT IT AND SAY, IT LOOKS OKAY TO ME, BUT, UM, I, I THINK THAT WE'RE, WE HAVE SOME REAL VALID CONCERNS, UM, ON, ON CONGRESS AVENUE AND MR. TYLER, I APPRECIATE YOU BEING ABLE TO COME AND GIVE US AN UPDATE.

UH, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE HAS BEEN QUITE A BIT OF ENERGY OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS EXERTED ON THIS PROPERTY.

AND WE CLEARLY, THE INTEREST REMAINS HIGH THAT THIS EVEN IN ITS CURRENT CONDITION IS SOMETHING THAT IS HANDLED APPROPRIATELY AND IS ULTIMATELY RESOLVED WITH A SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME.

W W WE'RE COMPLETELY ALIGNED.

WE HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY AND TIME THAT'S INVESTED IN THE PROPERTY.

YEAH, I AGREE.

COMPLETELY.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN.

TERRIFIC.

WELL, AGAIN, THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER, BUT MR. TYLER, IT IS YOUR INTENT TO PRESERVE THE FACADE, CORRECT? YES, SIR.

AND SO, YEAH, IT, AT SOME POINT, UH, I GUESS BEYOND COMMISSIONER TUCK'S REQUEST FOR PERIODIC INSPECTIONS, THERE WILL NEED TO BE A, A PRESERVATION PLAN PUT FORWARD TO PRESERVE THAT FACADE TO ENSURE THE INTEGRITY OF IT.

BECAUSE AS IT SITS NOW, UH, MORE OR LESS SUBJECT TO ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS ON THE INSIDE OF THE FACADE, WHICH IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO, TO FUNCTION THAT WAY.

SO I TRUST THAT YOU'LL KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU MOVE FORWARD.

ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, COMMISSIONER HAS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT, MR. TYLER, AGAIN, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT.

UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT GETS US TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.

UH, FIRST ITEM UP, I'M NOT MISTAKEN, GETS US UP TO BE ONE, UH, 38, 10 DUVALL.

AND WE'LL START WITH, UH, STAFF'S PRESENTATION.

[3.A.4. DA-2021-132111 – 301 San Jacinto Street – Discussion Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2) ]

I THINK WE SKIPPED A FOUR.

OH, EXCUSE ME.

YES.

A FOUR WAS GOING TO BE A DISCUSSION.

UH, THE FIRST ITEM IS A FOUR, A 3 0 1 SAN JACINTO STREET.

HOWEVER, I WILL SAY, UH, SINCE THIS HAS TO DO WITH AN INITIATION POSSIBLY OF HISTORIC ZONING.

AND, UH, IF THERE IS, WE UNDERSTAND OBJECTION, THEY WILL REQUIRE A SUPER MAJORITY.

UH, WE KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON SHOULD BE ON ITS WAY.

SO I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE SUSPEND THE ORDER OF THIS MEETING AND TAKE THIS UP OUT OF ORDER, UH, AT SUCH TIME WHEN WE WILL HAVE THE NUMBERS OF MEMBERS PRESENT, UH, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS? OKAY.

UH, LET'S SAY LET'S, LET'S HAVE THAT AS A MOTION THAT YOU, UH, WE, WE WILL TAKE A FOUR OUT OF ORDER.

SO MOVED.

OKAY.

THAT IS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COOK AND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY AYE.

IT IS UNANIMOUS.

OKAY.

UH, STAFF, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NOW WE MAY PROCEED WITH, UH,

[3.B.1. HR-2021-157034 – 3810 Duval St. – Discussion Hyde Park Local Historic District Council District 9]

THE REST OF THE ORDER ITEM B ONE, UH, AND THAT IS 38, 10 DUVALL STREET.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS CALLEN CONTURA CITY STAFF ITEM B.

ONE IS A PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS TO A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND A NON-CONTRIBUTING ADU IN THE HIGH PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT.

THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THREE PARTS.

FIRST PART IS TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND FLOOR ADDITION AT THE SOUTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS WITH DORMERS AT THE NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED MATERIALS INCLUDE FIBER CEMENT, SHINGLES, SIDING, COMPOSITION, ROOFING, SHINGLES, WOOD WINDOWS, AND STEEL EXTERIOR STAIRS.

THE SECOND PART OF THE APPLICATION CONSISTS OF AN ADDITION OF A SCREEN PORCH AT THE WEST ELEVATION AND AN OPEN PORCH AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.

PROPOSED MATERIALS INCLUDE FIBER CEMENT, SHINGLES SIDING, AS ON THE OTHER ELEVATIONS, UM, CONCRETE, CONCRETE PORCH AND RAMP.

UM, AND THIS PORCH AND RAMP WILL BE ENCLOSED, UH, WITH METAL SCREENS.

THE THIRD PART, UH, CONSTRUCT A SECOND FLOOR.

ADDITION TO THE EXISTING ADU PROPOSED MATERIALS INCLUDE FIBER CEMENT, SHINGLES, SIDING, VINYL, WINDOWS, AND COMPOSITION, SHINGLE ROOFING.

THE MAIN HOUSE IS A 1.5 STORY CROSS GABLED CRAFTSMAN, BUNGALOW WITH BRICK AND STUCCO CLADDING, DECORATIVE BARGE BOARDS, AND GOBLINS, A PARTIAL WITH THE PORCH WITH A GABLED ROOF EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS AND BRICK CLAD PEERS.

FENESTRATION INCLUDES SINGLE AND MULLED WOOD WINDOWS WITH DECORATIVE SCREENS.

THE EXISTING ADU IS A ONE STORY BUILDING WITH HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING ASIDE GABLED ROOF WITH EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS AND VARYING FENESTRATION TYPES.

THE HYDE PARK DANCE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE USED TO EVALUATE PROJECTS WITHIN THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT.

UM,

[00:35:01]

THE PROPOSED FIRST STORY OF YOUR ADDITION REQUIRES REMOVAL OF MINIMAL HISTORIC FABRIC WHILE THE SECOND FLOOR ADDITION REMOVES EXISTING ROOF MATERIAL WHILE THE PROPOSED REAR ADDITION IS APPROPRIATELY CITED.

THE SECOND FLOOR ADDITION IS LOCATED AT TOP OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE LINE AT THE MAIN FACADE.

THE LARGE STAIRCASE AT THE SOUTH ELEVATION MAY ALSO BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

THE ADDITIONS ROOF APPEARS TO MOSTLY BACK TO THE EXISTING HOUSE IN PITCH AND HEIGHT THOUGH.

IT'S COMPLEXITY AT THE SECONDARY ELEVATIONS APPEARS LESS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING.

HOWEVER, THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT AFFECT THE HISTORIC AGE, AGE CHIMNEY AND ITS STREET FACING WINDOWS ARE SIMPLE AND APPEAR COMPATIBLE.

THE PROPOSED SHINGLE SIDING IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING.

THE ADDITION HAS AN APPROPRIATE FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT.

IF IT APPEARS TO BE LOCATED LESS THAN 15 FEET FROM THE FRONT WALL OF THE HOUSE, THE REAR ADDITION IS APPROPRIATELY SIZED SCALED AND SIGHTED THOUGH.

THE EXISTING ADU APPEARS NON-CONTRIBUTING.

THE PROPOSED ADDITION DOES REMOVE HISTORIC AGE SIDING AND ROOF ELEMENTS.

UM, BUT THE ADDITIONS CHARACTER ELEMENTS ARE LARGELY COMPATIBLE.

THE PROJECT MEETS SOME OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS, BUT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONSIDER REFERRAL TO THE DECEMBER MEETING AND THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UH, FOR THE APPLICANTS TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY.

WE WILL, UH, YES.

UH, CHAIR MARS.

I NOTED THAT.

UM, OH, IN THE AGENDA IT SAYS IT'S A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND A NON-CONTRIBUTING ADU M AND MS. CONTRERAS JUST SAID IT APPEARS TO BE NON-CONTRIBUTING.

I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS ASSESSED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

THERE IT'S NOT HIGHLY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET WHEN I SAW THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF IT.

IT, IT APPEARS TO BE HISTORIC AGE AND HAS ITS HISTORIC DESIGN ATTRIBUTES.

CAN MS. CONTRERAS ADDRESS THAT? YES.

YES.

IT WAS NOT ASSESSED, UM, AT THE TIME OF THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION, UH, IT APPEARS THAT THERE WERE SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS, BUT WE CAN SHOW A PICTURE OF IT.

UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND, AMBER THERE'S I THINK MAYBE SECOND OR THIRD PAGE.

THERE WE GO.

A COUPLE UP, UH, ONE EARLIER AREA.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS THINKING OF.

ARE THERE TWO ACCESSORY BUILDINGS ON THE SITE? IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS JUST THE ONE ON THE PLAN THREE RECEIVED CHAIRMAN MARS.

OKAY.

THERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH THAT SHOWS A DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW AND, UH, WHAT LOOKS LIKE A HISTORIC DOOR, BUT THAT MAY BE ON THE SIDE ON, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S IT? THIS IS, THIS IS THE STREET FACING SIDE OF THAT.

EDU.

I BELIEVE IT'S A SOUTH FACING SIDE.

IT'S NOT FACING THE STREET FACING THIS OUT.

OKAY.

WELL, UM, I'LL TELL YOU ABOUT CHAIR MYERS.

WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE OWNER TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION.

WE CAN GET THAT CLEARED.

OKAY.

I JUST, I JUST DIDN'T WANT IT TO GO, UM, AS IF IT WERE A NON HISTORIC OR DIDN'T DIDN'T HAVE ANY, UM, ANY RELEVANCE TO THE S TO THE CASE.

OKAY.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF.

OKAY.

WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION, UH, STAFF.

IS THAT CORRECT? FIVE MINUTES OR ARE WE, DO WE HAVE A TIME ON THE TIME LIMIT ON THE PRESENTATION? FIVE MINUTES.

OKAY.

YES.

PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

CHAIR MYERS.

UH, VICE CHAIR.

I'M SAD COMMISSIONERS.

UH, I'M PAUL CARPATHIAN.

UM, MY WIFE, JULIA SPAN, AND I OWN THE, A JOINT IN QUESTION.

AND ACTUALLY, UM, I'M NOT HERE TO, TO, UH, PRESENT SO MUCH AS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

UH, IF THERE ARE, IF THERE ARE ANY, UM, UM, I'M NEVER APPEARED BEFORE A FIRING SQUAD.

I MEAN A COMMISSION BEFORE, BUT I'VE BEEN IN THE HOUSE SINCE, UM, WELL FOR, UH, NEARLY 34 YEARS, UH, WE WERE ON THE HYMAN HYDE PARK HOMES TOUR.

WE WERE ON PRESERVATION AND AUSTIN HOMES TOUR WHEN THEY WERE FEATURING THE CRAFTSMAN, UM, STYLE.

I NOTICED, UM, THE, THE, THE MENTION OF THE, IN COMPATIBILITY OF THE, THE S THE S

[00:40:01]

SHINGLES SIDING ON THE, ON THE SECOND LEVEL PROPOSED.

AND I WOULD STIPULATE THAT, UH, SITING ON A SECOND LEVEL OF CRAFTSMAN, THE CRAFTSMAN VERNACULAR IS, IS, IS VERY COMMON.

THEY, THEY WEREN'T DOING IT IN, IN THE CEMENT FIBER PRODUCT, BUT OF COURSE THIS, THIS PAINTS AS ANY, AS ANY SIDING WOOD, AND IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE BIT IMPRACTICAL TO DO S UH, SHINGLE SIDING AND IN THE WOOD THAT THEY USED TO DO IN THE OLD DAYS.

AND OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T REMEMBER IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER NOTES ABOUT IT THAT WERE OF INTEREST, BUT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

UH, MR. , THANK YOU FOR YOUR DISCUSSION.

UM, I KNOW THIS WAS PULLED WITH THE IDEA THAT, UM, SOME OF THE ITEMS IS STAFF INDICATED.

UM, THERE'S SOME CONCERN IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AND WITH THE ADU BEING A POTENTIAL CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE THAT, UM, YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO SOME ADDITIONAL INPUT OR SOME MODIFICATIONS TO MAKE THESE ADDITIONS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE HOUSE AS A CONTRIBUTING, UH, STRUCTURE.

UH, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK WITH, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR MORE SPECIFIC REQUESTS? UH, WELL, I REMEMBER YOU, OR ARE YOU PEOPLE DO SUCH GREAT WORK, UH, IN PRESERVING THIS TOWN, SO YOU BET, UM, WE'RE INTERESTED.

I MEAN, YOU BET OR, OKAY.

UM, COMMISSIONERS WOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT MR. , UH, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN, UH, AT LEAST WHETHER YOU'RE AWARE OF THIS, THE STAFF HAS SUGGESTED THAT IT MIGHT BE A GOOD THING FOR YOU TO COME VISIT TO, UH, OUR SUBCOMMITTEE.

UM, AND SO, UH, WERE YOU TO, UM, UH, BE ABLE TO MEET WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR SO? I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE MEETING IS, UH, THAT WOULD BE A CHANCE FOR WE, FOR MEMBERS TO GO IN DETAIL WITH SOME OPTIONS OPTIONS, WHICH SURE WOULD BETTER MEET THE CRITERIA.

OKAY.

UM, I BELIEVE THAT MEETING IS THE 29TH.

OKAY.

THE 29TH NOVEMBER.

ALRIGHTY.

UM, UH, THIS IS STILL A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND SO, UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER ITEMS YOU'D LIKE TO ADD TO YOUR DISCUSSION AND, UH, CERTAINLY COMMISSION MEMBERS, THE OWNER IS HERE AND AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

MR. CARR PATIENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANKS FOR ALL YOUR WORK.

OKAY.

UM, ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF, UH, OR SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ITEM B ONE.

OKAY.

WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, ANY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION PLEASE? UH, COME TO THE DICE AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

HELLO, I'M I'M CATHY JACKSON.

I LIVE DIRECTLY BEHIND THEM AND I'M NOT REALLY SO MUCH IN OPPOSITION.

I'M JUST NOT CERTAIN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO A VERY LARGE PECAN TREE.

THAT'S BEHIND MY HOUSE, ON MY PROPERTY.

AND, UM, I JUST COULDN'T TELL, SO I RECEIVED THIS NOTICE, SO THAT'S WHY I'M HERE.

OKAY.

WELL, MS. JACKSON, THANK YOU FOR COMING.

UH, I CAN SAY OUR JURISDICTION IS NOT SPECIFICALLY TO TREES, EVEN IF THEY ARE OLD, UH, OUR HISTORIC STRUCTURES, UH, AND, AND, UH, OTHER ITEMS OR, UH, OUR PURVIEW.

UH, I WILL SAY HOWEVER THAT THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS WHEN IT COMES TO BUILDING, UM, AS AN ARCHITECT, DEALING WITH THIS REGULARLY ARE VERY ROBUST.

UH, SO, UH, IF, IF IT'S A HEALTHY COUNTRY, UH, REST ASSURED THE ARBORISTS WILL MAKE SURE IT STAYS THAT WAY.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT FOR THE STRUCTURE OR AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE FOR THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

NO, I DON'T.

I JUST WANT MY TREE.

OKAY.

WELL, WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN AND, UH, YES.

UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN OFFER ANY HELP ON THAT, BUT AS I SAID, THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OKAY.

SECOND.

OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONER SECOND, INVITE SHARON MEYERS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING INDICATES SAYING I, UH, UH, OKAY.

THOSE OPPOSED IT'S UNANIMOUS AND WE ARE READY FOR A MOTION.

I'LL MOVE THAT.

WE POSTPONE THIS CASE TO OUR DECEMBER 17TH MEETING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO THE NOVEMBER 29TH CERTIFICATE, OR, UM, SORRY, UH, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TO DISCUSS DETAILS, UH, THAT MIGHT BRING THE PROJECT MORE IN LINE WITH FULL APPROVAL.

OKAY.

[00:45:01]

OKAY.

THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COOK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, UH, ANY DISCUSSION.

AND I DID WANT TO NOTE THAT I'M NOT GOING TO BE PRESENT ON NOVEMBER 29TH.

UH, BUT I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS THAT I WILL SHARE WITH THE PRESERVATION, WITH THE STAFF TO PASS ON.

THERE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF SIMPLE COMMENTS AND I TRUST THAT THE OTHER MEMBERS WILL WE'LL COVER THE DETAILS.

I THINK THIS IS, THIS IS PRETTY FAR ALONG, OBVIOUSLY.

UM, THE APPLICANT IS SENSITIVE, UH, TO THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE HOME AND, AND OPEN TO, TO IMPROVEMENTS.

BUT I CAN TELL THAT THERE WERE EFFORTS MADE TO MAKE THIS A COMPATIBLE EDITION.

AND I JUST THINK THERE'S A FEW MINOR TWEAKS REMAINING AND I'LL, I'LL PASS THAT INFORMATION ON SO THAT YOU HAVE IT BEFORE THE MEETING.

OKAY.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER LAROCHE.

OKAY.

SHARE MYERS.

YES.

I, UM, I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION TO POSTPONE AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

I'M CONCERNED.

THIS IS BETTY BAKER ONCE SAID THAT THERE WERE 395 BUNGALOWS IN HIGH PARK.

UM, I HAVEN'T COUNTED ALL OF THEM, AND THAT WAS A LONG TIME AGO.

MANY OF THEM ARE GONE NOW, BUT THIS PARTICULAR BUNGALOW IS DISTINCTIVE AND DISTINGUISHED PARTLY FOR ITS, UM, FOR ITS ROOFLINE AND THE PORTRAIT.

AND MY BIGGEST CONCERNS ARE THE, UM, THE PLACE, THE, THE ADDITION WILL RISE ABOVE THE RIDGE LINE.

AND I THINK MAYBE MAY DETRACT FROM THE CONTRIBUTING STATUS OF THE, OF THE BUILDING.

SO THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT, I WOULD LIKE TO TALK WITH THE APPLICANT FURTHER.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? UM, I'LL CALL THE QUESTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS CASE TO OUR DECEMBER 17TH MEETING AND TO REFER THE APPLICANT TO THE NOVEMBER 29TH MEETING, UH, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE INDICATE BY SAYING AYE, AYE.

ANYBODY OPPOSED? OKAY.

THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

UH, MR. CARR PATRON, WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING AND WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU NEXT MONTH OR ON THE 17TH.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

I'M PRESENT, BUT I AM STAYED FROM THAT LAST NOTE.

I JUMPED THE RENT AT THE END.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON.

WELCOME.

AND, UH, WE'VE WE THANK YOU FOR SIGNING IN AND, UH, GLAD YOU HAD A SAFE TRIP BACK FROM DALLAS.

WELCOME THIS EVENING, UH, WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER FEDDERSEN'S PRESENCE.

I BELIEVE WE CAN GO BACK TO THE CASE THAT WE, UH, SUSPENDED THE ORDER, UH, TO TAKE, UH, OUT OF ORDER.

AND WE CAN

[3.A.4. DA-2021-132111 – 301 San Jacinto Street – Discussion Council District 9 (Part 2 of 2) ]

GO BACK TO ITEM A FOUR, UH, THAT IS A DISCUSSION CASE, AND THAT IS A 3 0 1 SAN JACINTO STREET IS A STAFF PREPARED FOR THAT PRESENTATION.

YES, SIR.

OKAY.

THERE HAS TO GIVE A HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE, UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

THIS CASE CAME TO YOU ALL LAST MONTH.

WHEN YOU INITIATED HISTORIC ZONING ON THIS, UH, WAREHOUSE BUILDING, THIS IS A 1912 BRICK WAREHOUSE THAT WAS BUILT FOR WHOLESALE GROCERY OPERATIONS IN AUSTIN AND TELLS A CHAPTER OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY.

LIKE NO OTHER BUILDINGS REALLY CAN.

THIS IS, UH, THIS WAS BUILT BY THE NALLEY COMPANY.

WE WERE WHOLESALE GROCERIES, ALSO COMP COFFEE ROASTERS, AND THIS WAS THEIR RAILSIDE, UH, WAREHOUSE.

I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE HERE AND SEE THAT AUSTIN WAS TRANSFORMED BY THE RAILROAD.

AUSTIN WAS A SETTLEMENT.

IT WAS THE STATE CAPITOL.

IT WAS AN IMPORTANT TOWN, BUT IT DIDN'T BECOME A CITY UNTIL THE RAILROAD CAME TO TOWN.

AND THE RAILROAD BROCK, ALL KINDS OF MANUFACTURED GOODS, GROCERIES PRODUCE, UH, DRY GOODS TO THE CITY AND REALLY BROUGHT AUSTIN INTO THE PREP, INTO THE PRESENT AT THE TIME.

SO THESE WAREHOUSES ARE INTEGRAL TO UNDERSTANDING HOW FAST YOU GREW AS A CITY, AND THEY ARE SIMPLE UTILITARIAN BUILDINGS.

THIS ONE IS, IS QUITE LARGE, BUT AS VERY FEW ORNAMENTAL DETAILS, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S ALMOST BESIDE THE POINT.

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SCOPE

[00:50:01]

IS ITS ROLE IN HELPING TO TRANSFORM AUSTIN FROM A TOWN TO A CITY, BY BRINGING IN IMPORTED GOODS THAT LOCAL FARMERS, LOCAL CRAFTSMEN CAN PRODUCE HERE ON THEIR OWN.

SO THE NOW COMPANY HAD THIS BUILDING BUILT IN 1912.

THEY REMAINED HERE UNTIL 1917.

IT WAS THEN OCCUPIED BY THE SHEER COMPANY, WHICH WAS OWNED BY A LADY OUT OF WACO.

AND THEN, UH, THEY, THEY WERE HERE UNTIL ABOUT 1943.

AND THEN IT WAS SO TO THE JOHN , WHICH REMAINED HERE UNTIL THE BUSINESS CLOSED IN THE MID 1950S.

JOHN FREMONT WAS ONE OF THE MOST PROMINENT WHOLESALE GROCERIES AND BUSINESSMEN IN THE CITY.

UH, I THINK EVERYONE IS FAMILIAR WITH THE VERMONT LAW.

AND SO YOU GET AN, UH, AN IDEA AS TO ITS PROVENANCE AND AS WELL IN THE CITY AND BEING ABLE TO SUPPLY CITY RESTAURANTS, CITY HOTELS, UH, AND PRIVATE FAMILIES, GROCERY STORES WITH, UH, THE GROCERIES THAT WERE NECESSARY TO, TO LIVE IN AUSTIN AT THAT TIME AND NOT SOLELY DEPEND ON, UH, I DON'T WANT TO VARMINTS TO BRING IT IN AND TRAIN.

WE HAD THE, UH, UH, LEONARD EAST HOUSE, UH, UP FOR DISCUSSION TWO MONTHS AGO, AND LEONARD EAST HAD A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODEL.

HE DID ALMOST FACE-TO-FACE TRAINING FOR COMMODITIES, BUT IT WAS ALL LOCAL PRODUCTS.

SO VERMONT EXPANDED ON THAT AND ALLOWED FOR, UH, PURCHASED MANUFACTURED AND, UH, PROCESSED FOODS TO COME INTO AUSTIN.

AND THAT TRANSFORMED THE ENTIRE FOOD SCENE IN THE CITY.

SO THIS, UH, THIS BUILDING IS REALLY UNIQUELY IMPORTANT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF AUSTIN.

IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE MUCH.

IT'S JUST FOUR WALLS.

IT HAS VERY LITTLE ORNAMENTATION, BUT ITS IMPORTANCE IS NOT IN ITS APPEARANCE.

ITS IMPORTANCE IS IN ITS ROLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN INTO, UH, INTO, UH, A METROPOLIS INTO A CITY.

SO, UH, AFTER JOHN VERMONT CLOSED IN 1957, IT THEN BECAME A WHITE SWAN, WHICH WAS ANOTHER WHOLESALE GROCERY COMPANY.

UH, AND IN THE LATE 1970S, THAT'S WHEN THIS BUILDING SEEMS TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH WHOLESALE GROCERIES.

SO IT HAS A VERY, VERY LONG HISTORY, UH, AND A VERY IMPORTANT NICHE AND AUSTIN'S HISTORY.

UH, THE BUILDING REMAINS VERY MUCH INTACT AND, UH, IT IS UTILITARIAN.

NO ONE IS GOING TO SAY THAT THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING.

UH, SOME PEOPLE MIGHT, BUT, UH, IT IS, UH, IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT BUILDING AND THAT IS WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT YOU ALL RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY.

OKAY, MR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALL RIGHT.

UH, IF NOT, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, I GUESS WE'LL, WE'LL BEGIN WITH A PRESENTATION FROM THE OWNER OR THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

MY NAME IS RICHARD SUTTLE.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE HOUSTON FAMILY, AND I'M ALWAYS AMAZED AND VERY IMPRESSED WITH HOW STEVE CAN DESCRIBE A BUILDING IN A AND HOW HE MAKES IT SEEM SO IMPORTANT.

UM, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE FOLKS THAT HAVE OWNED THIS BUILDING AND THE FAMILY THAT HE IS TRYING TO ASSOCIATE IT WITH, IT DOES NOT AGREE THAT IT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF A HISTORIC LANDMARK, NOR SHOULD IT BE, UH, LANDMARKED THE FAMILY, THE HOUSTON FAMILY HAS OWNED IT SINCE THE MID 1920S THAT'S IN YOUR MATERIAL THERE.

UM, THEY WERE PART OF THE VERMONT FAMILY.

THEY'RE ALL RELATED TO VERMONT.

FAMILY HAS BEEN, UH, RECOGNIZED THROUGH THE VERMONT BLOCK.

SO WHAT'S YOUR FACE WITH TONIGHT IS BASICALLY JUST LIKE

[00:55:01]

MR. SANDUSKY SAID A FOUR WALL RECTANGULAR NONDESCRIPT DOWNTOWN WAREHOUSE THAT NOW IF THIS WERE TO MOVE FORWARD AND I DON'T THINK IT WILL, BUT IF IT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, IT'S BASICALLY PENALIZING A FAMILY.

THAT'S OWNED IT SINCE THE MID 1920S FOR KEEPING IT UP.

BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS, ONE OF THE CRITERIA THAT'S IN THE ZONING AND THE STAFF IS THAT THE BUILDING IS INTACT.

WHAT'S INTACT BECAUSE THE HOUSTON FAMILY, BECAUSE OF THEIR LOVE OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS KEPT IT INTACT AND THEY'VE HAD VARIOUS USES ON IT.

BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT, THAT YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR, IN YOUR BACKUP THAT THE EUSTON FAMILY DOES NOT WANT IT ZONED HISTORIC.

THE ONLY OTHER WAY IT GETS TO HISTORIC ZONING IS THROUGH ARCHITECTURE.

AND STEVE HAS ADMITTED THAT IT'S A NONDESCRIPT WAREHOUSE THAT WE USE AS A SYMBOL TO TELL A STORY DOWNTOWN THAT COULD EASILY BE DONE BY DOCUMENTATION AND, UH, UH, A PLAQUE OR, OR A BANNER OR SOME INFORMATION WAYFINDING OR SOMETHING.

BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT AN ARCHITECTURAL SPECIMEN THAT NORMALLY RISES TO THE LEVEL THAT YOU GUYS SEE ALL THE TIME THAT SHOULD BE SAVED.

SO BETWEEN THERE'S NO ARCHITECTURE, THE ASSOCIATION HAS A COOL STORY FOR WHAT THIS BUILDING WAS USED FOR, BUT THE FAMILY IS, IS, DOES NOT RECOGNIZE IT AS ANYTHING SPECIAL.

IT WAS THERE, IT WAS A WAREHOUSE.

IT'S WHERE THEY STORED STUFF IN THERE.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYBODY HERE.

IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? THERE THERE'S NO OUTPOURING OF COMMUNITY VALUE HERE, AND WE'RE GONNA, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO TURN THIS POOR FAMILY LOOSE TONIGHT AND NOT INITIATE ZONING.

UM, THERE'S NOT ANY MORE RESEARCH THAT CAN BE DONE.

WE WE'VE RESEARCHED THIS THING.

STEVE'S RESEARCHED IT.

UM, DOWNTOWN IS CHANGING.

UH, THIS FAMILY DOESN'T WANT IT RECOGNIZED.

THEY DON'T WANT THE RECOGNITION.

THEY JUST WANNA MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CHAPTER IN THEIR FAMILY'S LIFE AND BE ABLE TO USE THE PROPERTY, UM, IN ITS NEXT CHAPTER.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE, AND HOPEFULLY YOU WILL MOVE NOT TO RECOMMEND TO INITIATE ZONING ON THIS NONDESCRIPT WAREHOUSE, COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS MR. SETTLE, MR. SIDELL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

UM, I DO NOTE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT SURVIVES, UH, AND IS A RARITY BECAUSE IT SURVIVES AND I APPRECIATE EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

THAT THERE'S A RECOGNITION, UH, THAT THIS FAMILY ACTUALLY DID KEEP THEIR PROPERTY INTACT ENOUGH THAT, UH, THAT'S THE REASON WE HAVE THIS OPTION, BUT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT'S OUR JURISDICTION AND THAT'S OUR, UM, EVALUATION TO MAKE, UH, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, UH, BECAUSE OF ITS, ITS RARITY NOW, UH, THERE WERE MANY NEIGHBORS BEFORE THOSE HAVE LONG SINCE PASSED FROM US.

UH, SO WE EVALUATE THE ONE THAT WE HAVE.

YEAH, I UNDERSTAND IT.

AND ALONG THOSE LINES, YOU'VE ALREADY RECOGNIZED THE DOWNTOWN WAREHOUSE DISTRICT BY PUTTING HISTORIC ZONING ON WHAT WE ALL KNEW AS KIDS IS SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE, BUT THE WAREHOUSE BUILDING THERE, WHICH RECOGNIZES AND PUTS A PLACEHOLDER IN DOWNTOWN THAT THIS WAS A WAREHOUSE DISTRICT AT ONE TIME.

BUT IF YOU TOOK THAT LOGIC AND SAID, WE'RE GOING TO MEDALLION EVERY WAREHOUSE BECAUSE IT WAS COOL, THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE A DOWNTOWN.

LIKE WE KNOW IT TODAY.

YOU OKAY? THANK YOU, MR. SUTTLE.

ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, I'LL MAKE A MOTION ON THE CLOSING, THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO MOOD SECOND.

OKAY.

MOVE BY COMMISSIONER COOK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LITTLE, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

IS UNANIMOUS.

WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL RIGHT.

COMMISSIONERS, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'M GOING TO, I MOVE TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING BASED ON ARCHITECTURE, HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITY VALUE.

OKAY.

THAT IS THE SECOND THAT MOTION, I THINK COMMISSIONER, UH, THAT ONE'S WAY, UH, BEAT YOU TO IT.

SO THE COMMISSIONER COOK MAKES THE MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BALANCER.

SUELA UH, COMMISSIONER COOK.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR YES.

IF YOU WILL INDULGE ME, I HAVE QUITE A FEW THOUGHTS THAT I'VE BEEN COMPILING TOGETHER.

FIRST OFF, I DON'T EVER TAKE LIGHTLY RECOMMENDING HISTORIC ZONING AGAINST AN OWNER'S WISHES.

UM, I THINK IT'S, UH, THERE'S A HIGH BAR FOR A REASON FOR DOING THAT, UM, BECAUSE IT DOES IMPACT THE OWNER, BUT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO IS TO SAVE HISTORIC BUILDINGS.

AND I THINK THE PROCESS IS HARDIER AND GETTING HARDIER EVERY TWO YEARS TO PROTECT THOSE PROJECTS, DON'T THINK.

AND I AGREE IT PROBABLY

[01:00:01]

HAS A LONG ROAD TO HOE TO GET THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD DIE HERE AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

AND I HAVE QUITE A FEW FINDINGS OF FACT THAT I WANT TO, I WANT TO SHARE ALONG THE WAY TO HELP BUILD THE CASE.

UH, AS IT MOVES ON DOWN FOR THE NOW THE SHEER VERMONT WAREHOUSE, THE ORDINANCES, UH, THAT ALLOW US TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING REQUIRE THE PROPERTY BE 50 YEARS OLD, REPRESENT A PERIOD OF IT BEGINS 50 YEARS AGO, HAVE A HIGH DEGREE OF INTEGRITY THAT I THINK EVERYONE AGREES.

IT HAS AN DEMONSTRATED SIGNIFICANCE IN AT LEAST TWO OF THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES.

AND I'M GOING TO PARAPHRASE THE PORTIONS OF THOSE CATEGORIES THAT I THINK ARE SPECIFICALLY APPLICABLE TO THIS BUILDING.

ONE IS ARCHITECTURE OF THE PROPERTY EMBODIES A DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTIC OF A RECOGNIZED ARCHITECTURAL STYLE TYPE OR METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION.

THIS BEING A WAREHOUSE AND POSSESSES CULTURAL HISTORICAL, OR ARCHITECTURAL VALUE AS A PARTICULARLY FINE OR UNIQUE EXAMPLE OF A UTILITARIAN ORPHANED ACCURATE STRUCTURE.

I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT UTILITARIAN VERNACULAR STRUCTURES ARE INCLUDED IN THE ARCHITECTURAL CRITERIA AND FOR A REASON.

AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT MORE, A HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, THE PROPERTY HAS LONGSTANDING SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS WITH PERSONS AND BUSINESSES, WHICH CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO THE HISTORY OF THE CITY STATE OR NATION, UH, OR REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT PORTRAYAL OF THE CULTURAL PRACTICES OR THE WAY OF LIFE, A DEFINABLE GROUP OF PEOPLE IN HISTORIC TIME.

UH, AND I THINK THIS BUILDING DOES THAT, I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT AND COMMUNITY VALUE.

THE PROPERTY HAS A UNIQUE LOCATION THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CHARACTER IMAGE OR CULTURAL IDENTITY OF A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT BEING THE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT, I THINK IT VERY SOLIDLY MEETS THREE OF THE CRITERIA, WHICH IS QUITE UNUSUAL, UH, SPEAKING TO THE ARCHITECTURE.

UH, I PARTICULARLY PERSONALLY THINK IT IS A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING.

IT'S A HISTORIC LOAD-BEARING MASONRY BUILDING WITH ARTS TRANSOM WINDOWS.

UH, THE RES LANDING SPEAKS TO THE WAREHOUSE FORM AND THE RAIL YARD TRUCK LOADING USES CLEARLY IDENTIFIES THIS AS A HISTORIC WELL WAREHOUSE, A UTILITARIAN STRUCTURE, BUT THE DETAILED CORNICE ALONG THE TOP, UH, DETAIL SHOWS A SENSE OF AESTHETIC DETAIL AT AROUND THE TIME THAT THAT WAS DONE, UH, SUCH ATTENTION WAS PAID UTILITARIAN BUILDINGS.

YOU DON'T REALLY SEE THAT MUCH, UH, LATER IN THE 20TH CENTURY.

AND THIS SPEAKS TO A CERTAIN TIME, UH, THE ARTS TRANSOM WINDOW TRANSOM WINDOWS.

TALK ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION METHOD, BEING LOAD BEARING MASONRY, WHICH IT IS ITSELF.

A REMARKABLE THING.

ONCE YOU UNDERSTAND IT'S OLD WORLD CONSTRUCTION, THAT WAS STILL PRACTICED IN THE CITY AT THE TIME FROM BRICKS THAT WERE MADE FROM PROBABLY BUTLER BRICKS, I WOULD ASSUME MADE FROM COLORADO RIVER CLAY AND SAND.

IT'S TRULY BUILT FROM THE LAND AROUND AUSTIN.

AND IT TELLS THE HISTORIC THE STORY OF THE HISTORIC USE OF THIS AREA.

UH, AND IN TERMS OF, UH, I REVIEWED ALL THE EXISTING WAREHOUSES IN AUSTIN.

THIS WOULD BE THE OLDEST ONE REMAINING, UH, IT'S TIED WITH TWO 12 WEST FOURTH WITH WHICH SOME PEOPLE MAY REMEMBER AS FRODO OR FOURTH AND COMPANY.

THAT IS THE ONLY ONE OF EQUAL AGE REMAINING.

AND IN TERMS OF QUALITY AND DETAIL THOUGH, UH, REFINED AND LIMITED, THE ONLY OTHER WAREHOUSES THAT I'VE SEE THAT REMAIN OR HAVE SIMILAR ARCHITECTURAL VALUE OR THE STREAMLINE MODE, DARREN PROPERTY, WHERE, UH, THE JUAN PELOTA IS NOW AND THE DECO A HANDLEBAR WITH ITS CAST STONE DETAILS OR THE ONLY ONES THAT WOULD ARRIVAL IT.

SO, UM, THIS IS TRULY ONE OF THE FINEST ONES REMAINING, UH, HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS.

WE HAVE THE VERMONT NAME WHO DO HAVE THEIR OWN NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT WITH THE FAMILY AND THE COLLECTION OF HOMES THAT THE FAMILY OCCUPIED.

THIS IS A REPRESENTATION OF THEIR BUSINESS.

UH, JOHN VERMONT IS A VERY IMPORTANT NAME, UH, IN COMMERCE AND BANKING AND CIVIC LIFE.

AND HIS BROTHER HELPED TO FOUND THE, UH, GALVESTON RAILROAD, WHICH BECAME THE CENTRAL HOUSTON AND CENTRAL TEXAS CENTRAL