* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [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]
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, 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 RAILROAD. 
          SO YOU HAD JOHN VERMONT HERE WITH HIS BUSINESS AND PAUL VERMONT, AND STARTING PLANTING THE SEEDS OF BRINGING THE RAILROAD TO AUSTIN. 
          SO THE NAME IS KEY AND THEY DO MEET TOGETHER HERE IN THE WAREHOUSE. 
          AND THE VERMONTERS WERE ALSO INSTRUMENTAL IN STARTING HOOK AND LADDER NUMBER ONE FIRST VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT IN AUSTIN, WHICH, UH, WHOSE ULTIMATE HOME IS IN THE NEARBY BRUSH SQUARE IN THE 1930S BUILDING. 
          SO THERE IS A TIE THERE. 
          SO THE VERMONT NAME IS VERY MUCH PART OF THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. 
          WE HAVE TO HAVE ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS. 
          WE CLEARLY HAVE BOTH TO THE LETTER OF THE ORDINANCE, UH, IN THOSE TWO CATEGORIES. 
          I WANT TO KNOW THERE IS A STATE HISTORICAL MARKER. 
          I BELIEVE IT'S ACROSS FROM THE DRISCOLL WHERE THE LITTLE FIELD MALL IS NOW WHERE THEIR FIRST, UH, NON-EXISTENT STORE WAS. 
          UH, AND IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS THE OLDEST REMAINING STRUCTURE ASSOCIATED WITH, WITH THE BUSINESS AND IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY VALUE. 
          UM, I THINK THERE'S THIRD CRITERIA IS JUSTIFIED. 
          WE DON'T USE IT OFTEN, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S PROBABLY STRONG 
          [01:05:01]
ENOUGH AS A STANDALONE, BUT I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY WORTH ADDING, UH, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION. 
          WE DO HAVE THE NELSON DAVIS WAREHOUSE YIELDS, UH, SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE ON THE OPPOSITE END OF THE RAIL LINE. 
          THIS MARKS THE BEGINNING OF THE RAIL LINE. 
          SO IF WE HAD THESE TWO LANDMARK WAREHOUSES, YOU WOULD MARK THE PATH OF THE RAIL THROUGH DOWNTOWN. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. 
          IT'S LOCATION NEAR THE CONVENTION CENTER AT THE FRONT DOORSTEP OF OUR CITY TO MANY, MANY VISITORS HERE. 
          I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO ADD COMMUNITY VALUE AND IT'S THE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT. 
          THAT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UM, THE OFFICIAL WAREHOUSE DISTRICT IN GOOGLE MAPS IS ONLY, ONLY WEST OF CONGRESS, BUT IT'S CLEAR WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DISTRIBUTION OF WAREHOUSES, THEY'RE ALL REMAINING ALL ALONG THE RAIL LINE. 
          SO, UM, THIS CLEARLY IDENTIFIES AN IMAGE OF THE CITY IN A LOCATION WHERE IT CAN BE APPRECIATED BY VISITORS TO OUR CITY. 
          AND I WANT TO ADD, UM, WHAT WE HAVE HERE THAT WE DON'T NORMALLY HAVE WITH LANDMARKS IS CONTEXT. 
          AND WE HAVE A REALLY UNUSUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR PRESERVE CONTEXT ON THREE LEVELS. 
          FIRST, YOU HAD THE VERMONT'S AND IF YOU START FROM WEST TO EAST ACROSS DOWNTOWN YOU'LL, YOU'LL CUT A PATH FROM THEIR ORIGINAL HOMES TO THEIR, THEIR ORIGINAL STORE LOCATION ALONG THE OXCART ENTRANCE TO AUSTIN ON SIXTH STREET AND ENDING WITH THIS, UH, LOCATION OF THE LEGACY FAMILY BUSINESS ON FOURTH AT THE LOCATION OF THE RAIL LINE FROM THE EAST, WHICH PAUL VERMONT WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN THE BEGINNING AND THE NEARBY HOOK AND LADDER NUMBER ONE. 
          SO IT CUTS A LINE OF HISTORY ACROSS DOWNTOWN FOR THIS IMPORTANT FAMILY. 
          AND ALTHOUGH I KNOW TYPICALLY THERE'S ONLY ONE PROPERTY PER FAMILY. 
          I THINK THE VERMONT NAME WOULD JUSTIFY TOO, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THEIR IMPACT IN BUSINESS ON THE CITY. 
          I THINK THEIR BUSINESS LOCATION IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS THEIR HOME. 
          AND THEN WITHIN THE CITY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REFLECTING PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT. 
          THIS WAREHOUSE IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE HISTORIC RAIL LINE. 
          UM, AGAIN, MARKED WITH THE NELSON DAVIS WAREHOUSE WOULD BE MARKING EITHER INTO THE RAIL LINE, HAS PROXIMITY TO THE OLD DEPOT HOTEL, FURTHER DEFINING THE HISTORY OF THIS AREA. 
          UH, AND IT'S NEAR THE MODERN RAIL TERMINUS TO DOWNTOWN. 
          AND SO IT TIES, UH, PAST THE PRESENT REALLY, AND, UH, ADDS CONTEXT THERE. 
          AND THEN I MENTIONED THE CONVENTION CENTER, IF YOU CONSIDER WHAT'S AROUND THE CONVENTION CENTER. 
          NOW I THINK THIS WOULD REALLY ROUND OUT AN ARRAY OF LANDMARKS THAT WE HAVE AROUND THE CONVENTION CENTER. 
          WE HAVE BREAST SQUARE TO THE NORTH, UH, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY THE MARKET SQUARE, PARTICULARLY FOR COTTON, WHICH ALSO TIES BACK TO THE RAILROAD, WHICH PAUL VERMONT WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS OF BRINGING TO AUSTIN. 
          AND IT BALANCES OUT THE FIVE LANDMARKS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CONVENTION CENTER FOR HOUSES AND PALM SCHOOL. 
          UH, I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF WEIGEL IRONWORKS HAS THE INTEGRITY TO BE LISTED, UH, THE LOCATION OF ARMOUR IT'S BARBECUE, BUT WHAT WE HAVE HERE, IF WE CAN LANDMARK THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE AN ARRAY OF LANDMARKS AT THE FRONT DOOR OF THE CONVENTION CENTER, WHICH INCLUDE PUBLIC, UH, PUBLIC WORKS, EDUCATION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES, COMMERCE, INDUSTRIAL, AND RESIDENTIAL LANDMARKS. 
          AND YOU CAN GO, OH, HENRY AND SUSANNA DICKINSON ON THERE AS WELL FOR THEIR, THEIR HOMES IN RUSS SQUARE. 
          AND IT REALLY ROUNDS OUT A, UH, TRUE, UH, ARRAY OF HISTORIC TREASURES, UH, THAT CAN BE READILY ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE VISITING OUR TOWN. 
          SO TO ME, THAT SEEMS LIKE A WHOLE LOT OF ASSOCIATIONS AND A WHOLE LOT OF CONTEXT. 
          UH, AND I DIDN'T WANT TO KNOW I REVIEWED, UH, AGAIN, I REVIEWED ALL THE LANDMARKS THAT REMAIN. 
          THIS IS THE OLDEST REMAINING. 
          UH, IT IS ONE OF THE THREE WITH THE HIGHEST ARCHITECTURAL FORM, DEFINITELY FROM THIS PERIOD. 
          UH, WE HAVE THE ONE FROM THE THIRTIES AND ONE FROM I BELIEVE THE FORTIES, WHICH WOULD HAVE THE ART DECO AND THE MODERA, AND THAT I THINK WOULD MAKE STRONG CANDIDATES. 
          BUT ORIGINALLY AS OF AROUND 2000, THERE WERE 50 WAREHOUSES AS OF 2017, THERE WERE 44 OF THEM. 
          WE'VE APPROVED DEMOLITION OF 30% OF THOSE IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS. 
          UM, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN REMOVED, UH, THEY REALLY DIDN'T HAVE HIGH ARCHITECTURAL VALUE AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE ASSOCIATIONS. 
          AND IF YOU LOOK AT ALL, ALL OF THESE AND YOU LOOK FOR A NAME THAT YOU RECOGNIZE AND YOU LOOK FOR SOMETHING IMPORTANT, IT WASN'T JUST A GARAGE OR A CAR DEALERSHIP OR A BATTERY STORE. 
          UH, THE JOHN VERMONT NAME REALLY STANDS OUT THERE. 
          UM, KNOW, JUST DID WANT TO NOTE THAT I DO BELIEVE THAT THE TRUE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT, THE CORE OF THE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT ON THE 200 BLOCK OF A FOURTH WOULD BE THE IDEAL LOCATION TO PRESERVE WAREHOUSES, BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE A LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          AND, UH, THAT COMES FROM THE OWNERS. 
          AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN. 
          AND THAT'S, THAT'S NOT AN OPPORTUNITY. 
          I THINK THE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT DESERVES MORE THAN ONE LANDMARK WAREHOUSE AND OF ALL THE ONES THAT REMAIN. 
          THIS IS THE ONE THAT IS THE MOST QUALIFIED COMMISSIONER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER BALANCE. 
          WILA WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR SECOND? SURE. 
          UH, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER COOK FOR THAT. 
          UM, I THINK YOU'VE REALLY LAID OUT THE CASE WELL FOR US THIS EVENING, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH EVERYTHING 
          [01:10:01]
THAT YOU'VE OUTLINED. 
          UM, I APPRECIATE ALL THE RESEARCH AND WORK THAT WENT INTO PULLING THAT TOGETHER. 
          UM, I WILL JUST ADD ONE THING. 
          I, OUR, OUR CHARGE IS NOT ONLY TO, UH, DESIGNATE THE HIGH STYLE BUILDINGS OF AUSTIN, SUCH AS THOSE THAT ARE REPRESENTED BY THE BERMAN HISTORIC DISTRICT. 
          I THINK OUR CHARGE IS ALSO TO REALLY LOOK AT THOSE UNDERTOLD STORIES. 
          AND THIS IS TOLD HERE OF THE INDUSTRY THAT BUILT, UM, THE CITY. 
          SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION HALL WHOLEHEARTEDLY. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, UM, COMMISSIONERS FOR THE CONVERSATION COMMISSIONER LAUREL, I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD. 
          I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT HOW MUCH I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER COOK, ESTABLISHING WHY THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT EXAMPLE OF A VANISHING RESOURCE TYPE. 
          UM, DEFINITELY REPRESENTS AN EXTREMELY PIVOTAL FIGURE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY THAT AUSTIN BECAME. 
          AND I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION, OUR CHARGES TO EVALUATE WHETHER A BUILDING MEETS THE CRITERIA LAID OUT IN OUR ORDINANCE. 
          AND I THINK IT'S VERY CLEAR IN THIS CASE THAT THIS BUILDING DOES MEET THOSE CRITERIA. 
          OKAY. 
          OTHER COMMISSIONERS? YEAH. 
          THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON GO HOME. 
          YEAH. 
          I'LL, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION ONE. 
          THANK YOU GUYS. 
          OFFER WAITING FOR ME. 
          IT MIGHT'VE BEEN A MATTER OF NECESSITY, BUT, UM, I DO APPRECIATE IT AND ALSO VERY MUCH APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER COOK DOING ALL THAT, UM, RESEARCH AND PRESENTING THE CASE VERY WELL. 
          UH, THE ONLY THING I HAD TO ADD IS THAT I THINK THAT IF ANY, UH, BUILDING TYPE WAS GOING TO BE A CANDIDATE FOR SOMETHING LIKE PRESERVING THE FACADE AND ADDING VOLUME WITHIN, I WOULD SAY THAT A WAREHOUSE MIGHT BE THAT, GIVEN THAT TO KNOW WHAT AS A WAREHOUSE AND IT'S LIKE, IT REALLY IS JUST A SHELL CONTAINING AS MUCH VOLUME AS POSSIBLE. 
          UH, I KNOW THAT AS A COMMISSION, WE'VE SEEN A COUPLE OF THOSE IDEAS COME BEFORE US IN THE PAST. 
          AND THERE'S BEEN CONCERNED THAT WE'D BE SETTING A PRECEDENT. 
          I THINK SO FAR WE HAVEN'T SET OF BREASTS. 
          WE'VE, WE'VE REVIEWED THEM VERY CRITICALLY AND, UM, LOOKED FAVORABLY UPON THE ONES THAT WERE GOOD PROJECTS AND NOT FAVORABLY ON THE ONES THAT WEREN'T, BUT HERE'S A POTENTIAL CANDIDATE. 
          AND WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THAT. 
          NOW THAT'S A KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD TYPE THING. 
          I THINK WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS ARE THERE PARTS OF THIS PROPERTY WORTH SAVING IT AND DO WE DO OUR PART AND THE ANSWER'S? YES. 
          AND YES. 
          SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, MR. UH, YES. 
          CHAIR MEYERS. 
          WELL, I'M REALLY IMPRESSED WITH COMMISSIONER COOK'S RESEARCH AND DEDICATION TO THIS. 
          I'M AFRAID HE MIGHT BE REALLY STRONG COMPETITION FOR ME, UM, IN THE FUTURE ON FEATURE PROJECTS. 
          BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I RECENTLY LISTED, UM, ARE NOMINATED SUCCESSFULLY, UH, S VERY SIMILAR WAREHOUSE IN BROWNSVILLE, AND IT'S NOW A RECORDED TEXAS HISTORIC LANDMARK. 
          IT HAD THE, IT HAD THE, UM, THE BACKING IT'S SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, UM, WHO WILL USE SOME OF THE TAX CREDITS AVAILABLE TO THEM TO MAINTAIN AND, AND, UM, IMPROVE THE PROPERTY, UM, BUT RETAIN THE HISTORIC CHARACTER. 
          I, I'D ALSO LIKE TO SAY, I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT, UM, MR  WAS BEING MODEST ON BEHALF OF THE BUILDING IN TERMS OF, UM, OF ARCHITECTURE. 
          I TOO THINK THAT THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST EXAMPLES OF, UM, OF A WELL THOUGHT OUT WAREHOUSE BUILDING THAT INCLUDES AESTHETIC, UH, DETAILS SUCH AS THE SIGNAL ARCH WINDOWS AND THE CORNICE DETAIL. 
          AND IT'S, IT'S VERY INTACT. 
          AND FINALLY, I'D LIKE TO REMIND THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE AS OLD AS I AM, UM, THAT THE SPAGHETTI WAREHOUSE OWNERS, UH, DIDN'T SUPPORT THE DESIGNATION OF, OF THE WAREHOUSE BUILDING. 
          AND YET, UM, IT WAS, IT WAS CONSIDERED IMPORTANT. 
          I CONSIDER THIS BUILDING EQUALLY IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF, UM, OF ITS ARCHITECTURE, HISTORIC RESOURCE, UH, ASSOCIATIONS, AND, UM, AND THE PART OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY, UM, THAT WOULD OTHERWISE GO UNTOLD. 
          SO I'LL SUPPORT THE NOMINEE, THE MOTION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OTHER COMMISSIONERS. 
          WELL, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE ONE FINAL COMMENT ABOUT THE VALUE OF THIS PROPERTY TO THAT. 
          IF YOU LOOK AROUND NEBRASKA, THIS LOSS OR A MODELED AFTER WAREHOUSES, UH, YOU HAD THE SIENNA BUILDING WHOSE PODIUM IS MODELED AFTER WAREHOUSES. 
          UH, THE FIVE C TOWER 
          [01:15:01]
KEPT THE OLD ALAMO DRAFT HOUSE AND THE ADJACENT BUILDING FORM IN THEIR PODIUM. 
          AND YOU STILL HAVE A GHOST OF THE OUTLINE OF THE GINGER MAN IN THE HOTEL ZAZA. 
          SO, UM, THE GHOSTS ARE STILL THERE. 
          EVERYTHING'S BEING BUILT TO THE WAREHOUSE AESTHETIC IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I JUST THINK IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY SAD IF WE HAD NOTHING BUT GHOSTS AND MODERN RENDITIONS OF WAREHOUSES AND NOTE WAREHOUSES IN THE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT. 
          I MISSED YOUR, THANK YOU. 
          I WANT TO JUST TAKE A MOMENT TO REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS AND ALSO TO EXPAND ON THIS PLEA THAT I'VE BEEN, I GUESS, REALLY TRYING TO SOUND THE ALARM ABOUT BUILDINGS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS CORE, UH, THAT ARE WORTHY OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, OR IN MANY CASES HAVE ACTUALLY ALL RAVEN DESIGNATED HISTORIC LANDMARKS. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND THE FAMILY HAS BEEN STEWARDS OF THIS PROPERTY UP TO THIS POINT. 
          THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A LARGELY INTACT PART OF OUR HISTORY, UH, STILL TO POTENTIALLY PASS ON TO FUTURE GENERATIONS, UH, AS WE HOPE THIS ACTION WILL DO, BUT IT IS IN THE FACE OF A GREAT IMBALANCE ECONOMICALLY. 
          UH, I, I WOULD IMAGINE IF THE ECONOMICS WERE DIFFERENT, WE WOULDN'T BE IN THIS CONVERSATION AT ALL, UH, THAT THEY WOULD CONTINUE TO WISH TO HAVE SOME STEWARDSHIP OF THIS PROPERTY AS THEY HAVE UP TO THIS POINT. 
          BUT WHEN THE NUMBERS START ADDING UP AND YOU HAVE LOTS OF ZEROES ON THEM, UH, IT GETS HARDER AND HARDER AND HARDER TO MAINTAIN THE SCALE, TO MAINTAIN THE LIVABILITY, TO MAINTAIN THE CONTINUITY WITH OUR PAST, UH, HAVE A LOWER STRESS SCALE STRUCTURE OF A ONE-STORY BUILDING, UH, EVEN WITH A MODEST ADDITION, UH, AND MAINTAINING PRESERVATION. 
          UH, THIS OWNER IS GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF ECONOMIC PRESSURE TO, UH, DEVELOP THIS SITE, UH, WITH WHATEVER ROBUST DEVELOPMENT THEY CAN. 
          WE'RE TALKING OBVIOUSLY MULTI-MULTI STORIES. 
          SO I THINK WE NEED MORE TOOLS. 
          AND I THINK OTHER AREAS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIND EITHER WITH PROPERTY, UH, OR AIR RIGHTS SWAPS SOME SORT OF OTHER TYPES OF SUPPORT, UH, WAYS OF TAKING THEIR TREASURES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE SUBJECT TO, UH, DISPROPORTIONATE, SHALL WE SAY ECONOMIC PRESSURE AND FIND WAYS TO GIVE, UM, GIVE OWNERS THAT RELIEF AND GIVE OWNERS INCENTIVE, UH, AND NOT NECESSARILY THAT THEY'RE GONNA MAKE THE BIGGEST BUCK, BUT THEY ALSO DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS SUCH A DISPROPORTIONATE, UH, TYPE OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STAYING WITHIN THE HISTORIC, UH, INCENTIVES THAT WE DO HAVE. 
          UH, BUT ALSO LOOKING AT THE ALTERNATIVES TO A TEAR DOWN A NEW CONSTRUCTION ON SUCH A LARGE SCALE. 
          SO I REALLY WANT TO DO WHAT WE CAN, UH, ALSO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UH, CORPORATION. 
          WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE WHO'S WHO'S, UH, REPRESENTING HISTORIC PROPERTIES, AND I PASS THAT ON TO THEM. 
          UH, IT'S TIME FOR US TO INNOVATE. 
          AND IF WE DON'T, WE WILL BE HERE TIME AND TIME AGAIN WITH JUST ABOUT EVERY PROPERTY OWNER DOWNTOWN. 
          I'M SURE OF IT. 
          YES. 
          COMMISSION. 
          AND I DIDN'T WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT NOTE THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER FEATHERS, JEN ALSO DISCUSSED IT THE, THE SIZE OF THIS PROPERTY AND ASSUMING THAT THE ADJACENT, UH, WAREHOUSE, WHICH DID NOT HAVE AS TO HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS THAT WOULD JUSTIFY IT, SAVING IT, ASSUMING THAT IS INTENDED TO BE SOLD AS ONE LOT FOR A PROPERTY. 
          I THINK THERE IS ROOM FOR A TIERED, UH, TOWER DEVELOPMENT, MAKING THIS THE ENTRANCE TO A, A TALLER TOWER, UM, YOU KNOW, LANDMARKS, YOU PRESERVE THE FACADE. 
          AND WE HAD, HAD HAD A NUMBER OF CASES WHERE HE SHOWED THAT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT, UH, STICKLERS FOR, UH, STICKING WITH LOW RISE CONSTRUCTION NECESSARILY DOWNTOWN. 
          SO I THINK THERE COULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CREATIVE DESIGN THAT WOULD RETAIN THE STREET PRESENCE OF SUCH A MASSIVE BUILDING THAT COULD ALSO INTEGRATE IT AND MAKE IT PART OF AN INSURANCE TO A TALLER BUILDINGS SO THAT YOU CAN GET THE BALANCE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PRESERVATION HERE. 
          WE HOPE THE OWNER IS TAKING NOTES AND, UH, THEY MIGHT ALSO NOTE THAT I'VE SPOKEN VEHEMENTLY AGAINST JUST THOSE TYPES OF BUILDINGS AND THIS CASE I WILL MAKE AN EXCEPTION. 
          UH, I WOULD PREFER EVEN IF I WOULD NOT ENCOURAGE, BUT I THINK IN THIS CASE, I HAVE TO SAY IT'S A UNIQUE SITUATION WITH A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT PROPERTY. 
          SO, UH, I WILL PASS ON, UH, MY, MY SUPPORT OR, UH, RESONATE, UH, MY SUPPORT WITH YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS THERE, COMMISSIONER COOK. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY FURTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS? UH, WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, UH, TO, UH, WAIT TILL WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, TO INITIATE, UH, TO, TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE ZONING, UH, HISTORIC ZONING BASED ON THREE CRITERIA, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. 
          AND I SAID, LET'S, LET'S DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS CASE. 
          UM, UH, CHAIR MYERS, UH, HOW DO YOU VOTE ON THE MOTION? 
          [01:20:02]
OKAY. 
          I WILL VOTE IN FAVOR OF, UH, COMMISSIONER HEIM STAFF, UH, COMMISSIONER CASTILLO, COMMISSIONER CHRYSTIA VOTES IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON, MR. FEATHERSTON IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER COOK. 
          ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER COOK AND FAVOR COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, UH, COMMISSIONER LOTION FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER LITTLE COMMISSIONER, LITTLE IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER MCWHORTER, MR. MCWHORTER IN FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER VALANCE. 
          SUELA OKAY. 
          THAT IS UNANIMOUS. 
          AND THAT IS NINE MEMBERS OF SUPER MAJORITY. 
          SO THE MOTION PASSES. 
          ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER IS THANK YOU AT ALL. 
          UH, AND WE APPRECIATE THE, UH, INFORMATION BEING PASSED ON TO THE OWNERS AS WELL. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THAT BRINGS US TO THE NEXT CASE. 
          AND WE ALREADY DEALT WITH B ONE. 
          SO NOW WE'RE UP TO CASE 
          [3.B.2. HR-2021-148730 – 1600 Gaston Ave. – Discussion Davis House Council District 9]
NUMBER B TO THAT 1600 GASTON AVENUE. 
          HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. 
          THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE DAVIS HOUSE AT 1600 GASTON AVENUE. 
          UH, THIS HOUSE IS A HISTORIC LANDMARK. 
          UH, SO THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES MULTIPLE ITEMS. I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THROUGH EVERYTHING THAT IS INVOLVED IN THE CASE, BUT THERE ARE TWO SPECIFIC PIECES I BELIEVE, UH, WARRANT, FURTHER DISCUSSION, AND THEN I'LL GET INTO THOSE DETAILS WITH SOME VISUAL AIDS. 
          SO THE PROJECT INVOLVES REPLACING THE EXISTING CONCRETE PAVER DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE WITH LIMESTONE PAVERS AND THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY LOCATION, INSTALLING COPPER LANTERNS FLANKING THE FRONT DOOR AND ON THE SITE WALLS AT THE FRONT OF THE SIDEWALK, REPLACING AN OPERABLE, DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS ON THE FRONT AND EAST ELEVATIONS WITH PAINTED WOODEN WINDOWS WITH TRUE DIVIDED LIGHTS AND INSULATED GLASS TO EXACTLY MATCH THE APPEARANCE OF THE HISTORIC WINDOWS, INSTALLING A NEW WINDOW WITHIN A TALLER OPENING THAN EXISTING ON THE WEST, ELEVATION NEAR THE GARAGE. 
          AND FINALLY CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE GARAGE. 
          SO THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT AND THE GARAGE ADDITION ARE THE TWO PIECES I BELIEVE, UM, NEED THE MOST ELABORATION. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO START WITH THE, UH, WITH THE GARAGE. 
          AMBER, IF YOU COULD PULL UP THE OTHER BACKUP THAT SHOWS THE 2004 ADDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO STANDARD ONE AND THE HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH THE COMMISSION HAS ADOPTED FOR USE IN EVALUATING PROJECTS AT HISTORIC LANDMARKS STANDARD. 
          1.6 INDICATES THE ADDITIONS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR ALL LANDMARKS AND MUST BE EVALUATED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. 
          SO IN THE INTEREST OF CONSIDERING THIS PROJECT, I WANTED TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO A 2004 REMODEL PROJECT THAT WAS DONE THAT RESULTED IN SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE GARAGE. 
          THERE'S ALWAYS, THIS IS A 1946 HOUSE. 
          THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN ATTACHED GARAGE SETBACK AT THIS BACK CORNER OF THE HOUSE. 
          UH, BUT THE GARAGE ITSELF WAS MODIFIED IN 2004. 
          UH, UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T HAVE ELEVATION DRAWINGS OR A DEMOLITION PLAN SHOWING US EXACTLY HOW THOSE FEATURES WERE ALTERED. 
          UH, BUT THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE WAS INCREASED BY FIVE FEET. 
          SO LOOKING AT THE GARAGE FROM THE STREET, WHAT YOU'RE SEEING WITH THE, UM, TWO CAR OVERHEAD DOOR, THAT DOOR EXTENDS INTO THE FOOTPRINT THAT WAS EXPANDED. 
          SO WE DO KNOW THAT THAT STREET FACING ELEVATION WAS CHANGED. 
          THERE'S ALSO A SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION TO THE REAR, UH, AS WELL AS AN ADDITION, THAT'S VISIBLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE FROM THE STREET, THESE MODIFICATIONS WERE ALL IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME THE HOUSE WAS LANDMARKED IN ORDER TO A ROOF OVER THE ADDITION TO THE REAR OF THE ENTIRE ROOF WAS REPLACED, THAT'S SHOWN AND A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS THE, THE AREAS OF THE HOUSE THAT WERE RECEIVING A NEW ROOF. 
          SO WE KNOW BOTH THAT THE GARAGE DOOR OPENING AS WELL AS THE GARAGE ROOF WERE MODIFIED IN 2004. 
          SO WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT COMPLETELY INTACT HISTORIC FABRIC. 
          THAT IS AGAIN BEING PROPOSED FOR MODIFICATION. 
          UM, GIVEN THESE PRIOR CHANGES, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT ANOTHER ADDITION TO THE GARAGE IS SOMETHING THAT'S APPROPRIATE TO CONSIDER. 
          UM, SO AMBER, IF WE COULD SWITCH BACK TO THAT FIRST, UM, ATTACHMENT AND GO TO THE RENDERING, BUT SHOWS THE GARAGE ADDITION. 
          UH, SO THE CHANGES THAT WILL BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITION INCLUDE REDUCING THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE DOOR. 
          UH, SO THE LEFT SIDE IS WHY WE'RE SAYING, HAD BEEN EXPANDED INTO THAT FIVE FOR THE EXTENSION. 
          THIS WOULD BE MOVING THE RIGHT SIDE OVER, 
          [01:25:01]
UM, FOR SOME INTERIOR SPACE THAT'S NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITION, ADDING A WINDOW BETWEEN THE GARAGE DOOR AND THE SECONDARY ENTRANCE AND SHORTENING THE DEPTH OF THAT SECONDARY ENTRY PORCH, UH, RETAINING AND RELOCATING THE DOOR THAT IS PRESENT THERE. 
          THE LIMESTONE CLOUD EDITION WILL HAVE A PSYCH ABLED COMPOSITION ROOF WITH A ROOF SLOPE AND DETAILS TO MATCH THE HOUSE. 
          WINDOWS ARE PROPOSED TO BE ELIMINATED CLOUD WOOD WITH MULLIONS TO MATCH THOSE ON THE HOUSE. 
          AND THE WOOD TRELLIS WILL BE INSTALLED ABOVE THE GARAGE DOOR, NEAR THE HEIGHT OF THE EXISTING GROUP. 
          FACIA, GOING BACK TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS STANDARDS 1.2 AND 1.3 INDICATE THE SITE EDITION SHOULD BE SET BACK TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THAT ADDITION FROM THE STREET. 
          UH, PARTICULARLY IF THAT'S AN ADDITION THAT ADDS A STORY TO A BUILDING. 
          UH, SO PUTTING AT THE TOP THIS RECESSED GARAGE NATURALLY MEETS THOSE STANDARDS ALSO IN TERMS OF THE SCALE MASSING AND HEIGHTS. 
          UM, THIS IS A TWO STORY OR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO WHAT IS OTHERWISE A ONE-STORY LANDMARK. 
          UM, BUT THE, AGAIN, BECAUSE IT'S SETBACK BECAUSE IT HAS A RELATIVELY LOW, UM, EXTERIOR WALL HEIGHT, UH, IT DOESN'T OVERPOWER THE HISTORIC, THE HISTORIC HOUSE IN TERMS OF ITS, UH, DESIGN AND MATERIALS THAT LARGELY BORROWS FROM THE HOUSE. 
          BUT THERE ARE ELEMENTS FOR ONE TO TWO STORY HEIGHT, AS WELL AS THAT, UM, SHED ROOF DORMER THAT, UM, ARE COMPLIMENTARY TO, UH, BUT DON'T DIRECTLY MIMIC THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE HOUSE. 
          UH, SO IT'S DIFFERENTIATED YET COMPATIBLE, UH, THE OTHER, UH, PORTION OF THE PROJECT THAT I WANTED TO DISCUSS FURTHER. 
          UH, AMBER, IF WE CAN GO TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS, IT'S A REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT AND THE EAST SIDE OF THE HOUSE. 
          UH, THESE ARE ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS THEY'RE PAINTED SHUT. 
          AND ONE OF THE, THE ROOMS WITHIN THE HOUSE THAT HAS THESE WINDOWS AND EXCLUSIVELY HAS THESE WINDOWS, HAS THESE WINDOWS ON TWO DIFFERENT WALLS IS A BEDROOM. 
          AND SO THIS PRESENTS A FIRE EGRESS ISSUE THAT DEFINITELY NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED. 
          UM, AND CERTAINLY THESE ARE WINDOWS THAT ARE IN A STATE WHERE THEY NEED SOME WORK. 
          UM, AT LEAST FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED, THEY DON'T APPEAR TO BE DETERIORATED BEYOND REPAIR. 
          UH, AT THIS POINT THEY'VE NOT BEEN ASSESSED BY A WINDOW RESTORATION CONTRACTOR, UM, BUT IT'S, IT'S STAFF'S OPINION THAT THESE ARE WINDOWS THAT COULD BE, UH, TAKEN OUT RESTORED AND PUT BACK IN WITH LARGELY ORIGINAL MATERIALS REMAINING. 
          AND SO, UH, IN SUMMARY, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PROPOSED WINDOW REPLACEMENT ON THE FRONT AND EAST SIDE OF THE HOUSE. 
          UH, SO THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN WINDOW ON THE WEST SIDE, WHICH FULFILLS A FUNCTIONAL REQUEST. 
          UM, AND ALSO IS GETTING NEAR TO THAT GARAGE ADDITION WHERE THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER MODIFICATIONS TO THE HOUSE. 
          UM, IT'S, IT CERTAINLY IS WITHIN THE COMMISSION'S PURVIEW TO QUESTION WHETHER AN ADDITION OF THIS NATURE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS HOUSE. 
          CERTAINLY THIS IS A HOUSE THAT HAS OTHER EXISTING CONDITIONS, ADDITIONS THAT ARE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. 
          UM, BUT IF THE COMMISSION IS NOT COMFORTABLE WITH A SECOND STORY, ADDITION TO THIS LANDMARK, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE COMMISSION CONSIDER POSTPONEMENT AND REFERRAL TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, SO THAT I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS TO STAFF. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, IF NOT, UH, CAN WE HEAR FROM THE, UH, CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND WELCOME AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME? HELLO, MY NAME IS GINA ANDRE. 
          I'M THE ARCHITECT, UH, FOR THIS PROJECT FOR CGFNS DESIGN-BUILD. 
          THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS, UM, ALISON AND TRACE FRY AS DESCRIBED IN THE LETTER WE PROVIDED REGARDING THESE WINDOWS. 
          AND AS MS. FREDERICK HAS SHARED, THE OWNERS WANT TO REPLACE THEM FOR FIRE SAFETY. 
          THAT'S THE BEDROOM THAT'S IN THE FRONT IS THEIR DAUGHTER'S BEDROOM, BUT WHAT WASN'T IN THE LETTER THAT WE PROVIDED THAT THEY WANT ME TO SHARE WITH YOU IS THEY ALSO HAVE SECURITY CONCERNS WITH THESE WINDOWS. 
          THEY'RE RATHER LARGE WINDOWS. 
          UM, THE TWO FACING THE FRONT PORCH, UM, ARE THE LARGEST. 
          AND THEN THE TWO ON THE SIDE, WEST SIDE OF THE 
          [01:30:01]
EAST SIDE OF THE BEDROOM, AND THEN THE SMALLER ONE IN THE BATHROOM, UM, ARE A SMALLER SIZE, BUT THEY'RE CONCERNED THAT THE STATE THAT THE WINDOWS ARE IN, EVEN IF THEY WERE REPAIRED, STILL POSE A SECURITY RISK FOR THE HOUSE. 
          THE OWNER HAS SHARED THAT THEIR SECURITY CAMERAS CAPTURE PEOPLE ON THEIR PROPERTY SEVERAL TIMES A MONTH. 
          AND IN FACT, IN THE DAUGHTER'S BEDROOM, THERE'S FURNITURE PUSHED UP AGAINST THAT WINDOW. 
          SO IT TAKES IT, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES IT HARDER TO BREACH, I GUESS, IF THAT WAS, UM, SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAPPEN THERE. 
          SO THE OWNERS ASKED ME TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU ALLOW THEM TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS SO THAT NOT ONLY ARE THEY FUNCTIONAL FOR SAFETY, BUT THEY ALSO WILL PROVIDE BETTER SECURITY FOR THE FAMILY AND THAT THAT BE INCLUDED IN THE ITEMS ALLOWED FOR APPROPRIATENESS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS ANY, UH, THANK YOU. 
          UH, MS. ANDRE, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS MS. ANDRE? NOPE. 
          OKAY. 
          NOW, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM EITHER FOR OR AGAINST? ALL RIGHT. 
          SEEING NONE, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          SO MOVED, UH, COMMISSIONER ROUGE, SECONDED BY MR. PORTER. 
          UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. 
          AYE. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, ANY AGAINST, AS EVERYBODY'S FOR ALL RIGHT. 
          UNANIMOUS, UH, MEDIA HEARING IS CLOSED AND NOW WE MAY TAKE, UH, ACTION ON THIS ITEM COMMISSIONERS. 
          DO I HEAR A MOTION? I'LL MOVE THAT WE POSTPONE THIS CASE TO OUR DECEMBER 17TH MEETING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING ON THE NINTH 29, 29, 29. 
          I'LL SECOND, THE MOTION. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, AND MS. ANDRE, ARE YOU AWARE OF THE PROCEDURE? WELL, WE'LL HAVE YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO GO INTO DETAIL WITH ANY OF THOSE QUESTIONS WORK WITH SOME OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES, SOME OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE, AND THEN, UH, WE WILL HAVE YOU BACK FOR A TIME CERTAIN, UH, OR SPECIFIC TIME ON, UH, IF THIS MOTION CARRIES, UH, IN DECEMBER, UH, ANY DISCUSSION, UH, OKAY. 
          I, TO, I WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING WHERE THE GARAGE MAY HAVE HAD SOME ADDITIONS MAY HAVE HAD SOME MODIFICATIONS OF HER TIME, BUT NOTHING AS SUBSTANTIAL OR SIGNIFICANT TO THE, TO THE HISTORIC CHARACTER AND FABRIC OF THIS HOUSE AS A TWO-STORY ADDITION. 
          AND THIS IS A LANDMARK AND INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK, UM, THE APPLICANTS RECEIVE A CONSIDERABLE TAX BREAK, UM, FOR HAVING A LANDMARK. 
          AND I THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD DISCUSS AT THE, AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING IS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF A TWO-STORY ADDITION TO WHAT IS A, A KIND OF LOW PROFILE OF ONE STORY HOUSE AND ATTACHED GARAGE. 
          SO THAT'S, UM, THAT'S MY CONCERN ON THIS. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER COOK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR EMOTION? OH, I'M SORRY. 
          I'M AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO BE AT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UH, JUST TO HAVE LIKE THREE COMMENTS AT ALL FORWARD ON TO STAFF TO SHARE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER ROCHE? YEAH, I GUESS I, I SOMEWHAT QUESTIONED THE, UH, W THE WINDOW RESTORATION, JUST AT LEAST FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS. 
          I SEE COMMISSIONER COOK, NODDING HIS HEAD, AT LEAST IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS. 
          IT, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THEY WOULD BE, UH, AN APPROPRIATE CANDIDATE TO REBUILD THE WINDOW. 
          IT DOESN'T, TO ME, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO JUSTIFY REPLACEMENT. 
          SO I BELIEVE THAT TO THE ARCHITECTURAL SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT JUST MY COMMENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER LEVEL, ALL SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          UM, I DO THINK THAT THIS IS A PROJECT THAT SHOULD GO BEFORE THE ARCHITECTURE COMMITTEE. 
          I ALSO QUESTION THE APPROPRIATENESS OF ADDING A TWO-STORY ADDITION. 
          THIS IS AN UNUSUAL BUILDING TYPE FOR US TO HAVE AS AN INDIVIDUAL CITY LANDMARK. 
          AND I JUST DON'T SEE A SECOND STORY ADDITION ON TOP OF THAT GARAGE. 
          IT COMPLETELY CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS, THEY CAN FIND A WAY TO MAKE THAT BETTER, BUT I QUESTIONED THAT ASPECT OF IT. 
          AND ALSO THOUGH THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT, I THINK THESE WINDOWS SHOULD AT LEAST BE EXAMINED TO SEE IF THEY CAN BE REPAIRED AND RESTORED AND MAYBE STORMS OR SOMETHING ADDED TO ADDRESS THEIR SECURITY CONCERNS. 
          BUT I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE PICTURES THAT MERITS OUTRIGHT 
          [01:35:01]
REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS ON AN INDIVIDUAL CITY, LANDMARK AND OTHER DISCUSSIONS. 
          UH, I ALSO, I I'M, I'M APPRECIATIVE OF STAFF'S OBSERVATION ABOUT THE GARAGE AND THAT AS THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE TAKES A LOOK, IF, IF A TWO-STORY ADDITION IS NOT APPROPRIATE THERE, UH, I MEAN, THEY, THEY'VE CREATED A FORM THAT IS A STANDALONE AND IS DISTINCT AND IS SEPARATE. 
          SO IT THOUGH IT HAS RELATIONSHIP TO THE EXISTING, IT JUST CLEARLY CAN BE DISTINGUISHED FROM THE EXISTING. 
          SO, UM, IF IT'S NOT IN THAT LOCATION, WHAT WOULD BE A PREFERABLE LOCATION? UH, NOT THAT SOMEBODY HAS TO HAVE A LANDMARK AND IS GUARANTEED THE ABILITY TO PUT A TWO STORY ADDITION ON, BUT IN ORDER TO WORK WITH AN OWNER IN THE PROGRAM, IF THERE WERE WAYS THAT WE REALLY COULD EVALUATE THAT, UH, I CAN S I CAN SEE COMING ROUND WHO THAT BEING, UH, PREFERABLE TO OTHER POTENTIAL AREAS WHERE IT WOULD BE MORE OBTRUSIVE. 
          SO I THINK THERE WAS SOME GOOD EFFORT AND THOUGHT IN PUTTING THE LOCATION THE WAY IT IS AND INSTRUCTING IT THE WAY THEY DID. 
          SO I'LL BE INTERESTED TO SEE THE COMMITTEE'S COMMENTS, UH, APPRECIATE THE OWNERS, UH, WORKING WITH US ON THAT, UH, ASSUMING THE MOTION PASSES. 
          SO, UH, AT THIS POINT, I'LL CALL THE QUESTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING UNTIL THE DECEMBER 17TH, UH, INDICATE BY SAYING AYE, AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. 
          AND THAT ALSO PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AND, UH, MS. ANDRE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING BACK AND WORKING WITH US ON THAT. 
          AND WE INVITE HER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. 
          YES. 
          SPECIFICALLY, WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. 
          WE GET A LOT OF GOOD WORK DONE. 
          UH, AND THANK ALSO THE MEMBERS, UH, WHO PUT IN LOTS AND LOTS OF GOOD HOURS AS WELL. 
          UH, APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS. 
          UH, THE NEXT ITEM FOR A PRESENTATION IS ITEM C ONE THAT WOULD BE 14, 11 F RIDGE AVENUE. 
          AND WE WILL HAVE THE PRESENTATION FROM STAFF 
          [3.C.1. HR-2021-154877 – 1411 Ethridge Ave. – Discussion (postponed October 25, 2021)]
COMMISSIONERS ITEM C. 
          ONE IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH CIRCA 1939 CONTRIBUTING BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED OUTBUILDINGS. 
          THIS IS A TWO-STORY SYMMETRICAL PLAN, CROSS GABLED CLASSICAL REVIVAL HOUSE WITH SIX, OVER SIX AND NINE OF HER NINE WOOD WINDOWS, OR AS GENTLE SIDING AND A FULL-WIDTH PORCH SUPPORTED BY BOX COLUMNS DETAILS INCLUDE DENTALS AT THE CORNICE, SIDELIGHTS AND TRANSOM AT THE FRONT DOOR. 
          CORNERS RETURNS AT THE GABLE ENDS AND WOOD SHUTTERS. 
          1411 ETHERIDGE WAS IN 1939 FOR CLAUDE A AND CLARA WILLIAMS. CLAUDE WILLIAMS SERVED AS TEXAS AS ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE AT THE TIME OF THE HOME'S CONSTRUCTION. 
          HE WENT ON TO HEAD THE TEXAS UNEMPLOYMENT COMMISSION BY 1949, DR. 
          REVIS KNOWN AS SAM AND MARGARET AND SWEAR, AND HAD PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. 
          SAM SWEARING-IN SERVED AS THE CHIEF OF STAFF, CHIEF OF SURGERY AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT BRACKEN RIDGE HOSPITAL. 
          HE LATER BECAME CHIEF OF STAFF AT THE AUSTIN STATE HOSPITAL MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF THE DENTON STATE SCHOOL AND MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF THE ST. 
          ANGELO STATE CENTER. 
          THIS PROPERTY CONTRIBUTES TO THE OLD WEST AUSTIN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT. 
          AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONSIDER INITIATING HISTORIC ZONING, UH, SHOULD THE COMMISSION DECIDE AGAINST INITIATION, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS COMPLETION OF A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE PRIOR TO PERMIT RELEASE. 
          ADDITIONALLY, NEW CONSTRUCTION AND NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS MUST BE REVIEWED BY THE COMMISSION PRIOR TO RELEASE OF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND COMMISSIONERS, YOU MAY REMEMBER, UH, THIS WAS POSTPONED FROM OUR OCTOBER 25TH MEETING, UH, AND WE SAW IT AT THAT POINT, UH, MS. CONTRACTS, UH, QUICK QUESTION. 
          UM, DID WE HAVE, UM, INFORMATION IN OUR BACKUP THAT THIS WAS, THIS IS NOW A FULL DEMOLITION, AS OPPOSED TO A, UH, MODIFICATION OF THAT HOUSE? I BELIEVE WE S IF I'M MISTAKING IT FOR ANOTHER HOUSE, WAS THERE SOME, UH, RENOVATION OR ADDITIONS THAT WERE GOING TO BE PROPOSED AT THE 25TH OR WAS THIS STRICTLY A DEMOLITION PERMIT THAT THIS ONE CAME TO US AS A DEMOLITION. 
          OKAY. 
          I'M CONFUSING IT WITH ANOTHER, UH, SIMILAR HOUSE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONERS OF STAFF. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, THANK YOU. 
          UH, WE CAN HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, UH, IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? OKAY. 
          UH, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS MOTION OR SPEAK ON THIS CASE? EXCUSE ME. 
          [01:40:01]
ALL RIGHT, PLEASE COME ON DOWN AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, UH, ON THE REBECCA BURRIS, ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE INITIAL, UH, PEOPLE THAT PUT THE APPLICATION IN HAVE BACKED OUT ON THE CONTRACT. 
          SO WE WERE WANTING TO REALLY JUST, UH, PUT THIS IN, IN POSTPONEMENT UNTIL SOMETHING ELSE HAPPENS ON THE PROPERTY. 
          MAYBE THE NEXT BUYERS WON'T WANT TO DEMOLISH IT. 
          WE DON'T KNOW. 
          UH, SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT, UM, WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT AT THIS POINT YOU HAVE NO ACTION THAT YOU ARE NEEDING TO TAKE ON THIS. 
          NO, NO, WE DON'T NEED TO TAKE IT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NEXT BAR WILL WANT TO DO. 
          I MEAN, THE PROPERTY IS IN BAD CONDITION, AND I PERSONALLY THINK THAT IT IS READY FOR DEMOLITION, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONTRACT THAT WE GET IN ON THE PROPERTY WE'LL WANT TO DO. 
          AND THERE COULD BE SOME SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGE. 
          WE'RE THERE TO BE A HISTORIC ZONING ON YOUR PROPERTY. 
          AND THERE ARE CERTAIN PEOPLE AND CERTAIN WAYS THAT, UH, NOT ONLY CAN CERTAIN TYPES OF, UH, WORK BE DONE, BUT ALSO A LOT OF EXTRA SUPPORT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE. 
          WELL, I MEAN, IT'S LIKE, IT WOULD NEED EVERYTHING FROM WIRING AND IT'S, I MEAN, IT'S LIKE IF THE HOUSE IS NOT IN GOOD CONDITION, IT LOOKS GOOD, BUT IT'S NOT IN GOOD CONDITION. 
          AND WE WERE THINKING WAS MY MOTHER PASSED AWAY EVERY HOUSE ALONG THE SIDE OF US AND ACROSS FROM US HAVE ALL BEEN DEMOLISHED AND THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION. 
          SO WE REALLY DIDN'T EXPECT THAT WE WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, AN ISSUE WITH IT. 
          BUT, AND, UM, AND MS. BURRS WERE POSTED TO CONSIDER WHETHER INITIATION OF HIS HISTORIC ZONING IS APPROPRIATE. 
          UH, THE STAFF HAS GIVEN SOME INDICATION OF WHY THAT MIGHT BE, UH, OF VALUE, BUT WE HAVE NOT MADE A DECISION OURSELVES WE'RE STRICTLY POSTED. 
          AND AS YOU CORRECTLY IDENTIFIED, ONE OF THE ACTIONS WE COULD TAKE, UH, AS YOU HEARD EARLIER IN THE MEETING IS NOT ONLY THE POSTPONEMENT, BUT AN INDEFINITE POSTPONE. 
          THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING IN DEPTH, DEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, UNTIL MORE, MORE HAPPENS WITH THE PROPERTY. 
          YEAH. 
          SO NO, NO CHANGE WOULD TAKE PLACE IN THE STATUS, BUT WE WOULD STILL BE BASICALLY IN OUR QUEUE FOR THAT 180 DAY PERIOD IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING WERE TO COME FORWARD. 
          EXACTLY. 
          WE CAN PICK IT RIGHT UP WHERE WE WANT 80 DAYS. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, ANY QUESTIONS OF MS. BURRIS COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. 
          WE THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING AND WE WILL BE DISCUSSING THIS. 
          UH, SO, OKAY. 
          SO THEN IF I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COULD I CALL MS. MS. CONTRERAS? ABSOLUTELY. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          DON'T LEAVE WITHOUT GETTING THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, SO THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? UH, THAT THERE IS NONE. 
          I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          SO WE'LL MOVE COMMISSIONER. 
          UH  UH, SECOND CHAIR, MYRA. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. 
          UH, PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. 
          UH, THERE IS NO OPPOSITION. 
          ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS. 
          UH, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE US DO? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION COMMISSIONER, LITTLE, I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE INDEFINITELY POSTPONE THIS CASE. 
          NOT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MERIT HISTORIC ZONING, BUT THE FACT THAT THE REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S GOING TO TIME OUT AND I DON'T FEEL THERE'S NEED TO MAKE A DECISION AT THIS POINT AND LEAVE OUR OPTIONS OPEN. 
          OKAY. 
          IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? SECOND FROM CHAIR MYERS, UH, COMMISSIONER LITTLE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD MORE TO SPEAK ON YOUR MOTION? UH, I DO THINK READING THROUGH THE STAFF REPORT THAT THIS PROPERTY COULD MEET OUR CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION, BUT I FEEL LIKE IF THE OWNER IS NOT INTERESTED IN HISTORIC ZONING AT THIS POINT, AND THEY DON'T HAVE A PRESSING NEED TO DEMOLISH THE PROPERTY EITHER. 
          I DON'T SEE A NEED FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH INITIATING HISTORIC ZONING AT THIS TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENT ON YOUR SECOND? I WOULD LIKE, UM, TO ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT, TO SEEK AN OWNER, A BUYER FOR THIS HOUSE WHO WOULD LOVE IT AND EMBRACE ITS HISTORIC CHARACTER. 
          THE WORD IS OUT, THE WORD SHOULD BE OUT. 
          YES. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER'S OTHER COMMENTS? YES. 
          COMMISSIONER BALANCE OIL. 
          I DON'T MEAN TO DRILL THIS POINT, BUT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A DEMOLITION PERMIT, UM, THAT IS OFFICIALLY BEEN WITHDRAWN. 
          I WOULD ASK THAT WE CONSIDER LEAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN JUST SO THAT IT DOESN'T TIME OUT AFTER TWO WEEKS BECAUSE WE HAVE POSTPONED IT INSTEAD OF MAKING COMMISSIONER BALANCE LOYOLA. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, I THINK, UH, WOULD BE, UH, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO, UH, REOPEN 
          [01:45:01]
THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          UH, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT RECONSIDERATION TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING CAN BE MADE EVEN AS THE OTHER MOTION IS ON THE TABLE. 
          SO, UM, IF YOUR COMMENT WOULD BE IN THE TERMS OF EMOTION, I WILL ENTERTAIN THAT MOTION SOMEWHAT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UH, WITH A MOTION TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, IS THERE A SECOND COMMISSIONERS, UH, COMMISSIONER MCWHORTER, UH, UH, ALL THOSE, THAT'S NOT A DISCUSSION ITEM. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE SAYING HI. 
          OKAY. 
          IT'S UNANIMOUS. 
          THE PUBLIC HEARING REMAINS OPEN AND WE STILL HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, UH, TO HAVE AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT. 
          UH, ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER FEATHERS, COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON? YEAH, JUST THE, A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE AND THE MOTION ON THE TABLE. 
          I THINK THAT, UH, IT MIGHT BE NICE TO HAVE A REFRESHER FROM STAFF ON, UM, WHAT ARE THE REPERCUSSIONS OF DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, UH, THAT WE'RE SORT OF LEAVING THIS, UM, ACE OPEN-ENDED, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY THAT, UH, MAY, MAY BE ZONED HISTORIC OR MAY WARRANT HISTORIC ZONING. 
          UM, BUT IT'S CURRENTLY IN SOME STATE OF DISREPAIR. 
          UH, I JUST FEEL LIKE WE'RE SORT OF, WE MIGHT BE PUTTING OURSELVES IN A POSITION. 
          IT MIGHT BE NICE TO HEAR FROM STAFF AGAIN. 
          UM, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE RAMIFICATIONS OF DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT STAFF? UH, IS THERE ANY, ANY QUICKER RESPONSE AND THEN IF NECESSARY A FOLLOW-UP WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AT A FUTURE MEETING, AND IT MIGHT ALSO BE WORTH CLARIFYING FOR COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON THAT BEFORE YOU ARRIVED AT THE MEETING TODAY, STAFF GAVE A PRETTY LENGTHY DESCRIPTION ABOUT, UM, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENTS, BUT I THINK YOU MISSED YES. 
          YES, ABSOLUTELY. 
          THAT'S NOT A TOOL WE HAVE BEEN USING, BUT, UH, ONE THAT WE HAVE LEARNED OF AND, UH, WE'LL MAKE GOOD USE OF GOING FORWARD, UM, IN TERMS OF DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT. 
          UM, WE, WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE A PROSPECTIVE LANDMARK THAT IS ON THE MARKET. 
          SO, UM, I WOULD SIMPLY ADVISE, WAITING TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS CASE SO THAT THE STAFF CAN CERTAINLY MAKE NOTE OF THAT CONCERN, UH, REGARDING THIS PROPERTY. 
          UH, THERE ARE OTHER PROPERTIES, UM, DESIGNATED LANDMARKS THAT WE ARE MONITORING AS WELL. 
          AND, UH, WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU WITH SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THE DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT PROCESS AT A FUTURE MEETING. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER IS ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? OKAY. 
          SEEING NONE, UH, I'LL CALL THE QUESTION, UH, TO HAVE THIS CASE, UH, POSTPONED INDEFINITELY, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE, OR RAISE YOUR HAND. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY OPPOSED AND SEEING NONE THAT IS UNANIMOUS. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SO THAT IS NOW JOINING THE INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT LIST. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, ARE, LET'S SEE. 
          FINAL CASE TONIGHT IS ITEM D 
          [3.D.4. PR-2021-148307 – 2500 Rosewood Ave. – Discussion Council District 1]
FOUR, UH, THAT'S 2,500 ROSEWOOD AVENUE. 
          AND, UH, LET'S SEE, WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION TONIGHT. 
          WE DO SPEAK SEBASKI THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE. 
          THIS CASE IS UP FOR CONSIDERATION OF A DEMOLITION PROGRAM. 
          IT'S A 1948 HOUSE. 
          IT'S GOT ELEMENTS OF MID-CENTURY MODERN, UH, DESIGN PRINCIPLES, AND MOST, MOST PRINCIPALLY BE A LARGE STONE CHIMNEY. 
          UH, THE WINDOWS WERE REPLACED IN 2013 AND THE HOUSE HAS A VERY INTERESTING HISTORY. 
          IT WAS BUILT IN 1948 OR MUSIC PROFESSORS AT HOUSTON TILLOTSON COLLEGE, UH, BERTRAND AND HAZEL POOL ADAMS. THEY LIVED HERE ALMOST UNTIL THE TIME OF THEIR DEATHS AND THEY WERE VERY ACTIVE IN THE MUSIC AND BAND DEPARTMENTS TODAY. 
          T BERTRAND ADAMS WAS ALSO A BANDLEADER IN AUSTIN. 
          HE PLAYED MUSICAL RECITALS FOR THE COMMUNITY AND TAUGHT MUSIC AT HT TILL 1955. 
          HE LEFT, UH, THE ACADEMIC WORLD TO BECOME AN AGENT FOR AN ALL-BLACK INSURANCE COMPANY, INFORMED THE AUSTIN CHAPTER OF THE NASHVILLE BUSINESS LEAD, EXCUSE ME, HAZEL ADAMS CONTINUE TEACHING IT UNTIL IT'S AND THEN THE MUSIC DEPARTMENT, AND BOTH OF THEM CONTRIBUTED HEAVILY TO PROMOTING AUSTIN'S BLACK MUSICIANS, UH, STAFF EVALUATED THIS HOUSE, OR 
          [01:50:01]
A DESIGNATION AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK AND DECIDED THAT, UH, THE BEST RECOMMENDATION HERE WOULD BE TO RECOMMEND POSTPONEMENT TO DECEMBER 17, UH, TO LOOK AT OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION, BUT ALSO TO EXPLORE THE CRITERION FOR HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS AND BERTRAND AND HAZEL ADAMS. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO POST POSTPONE TO THE DECEMBER MEETING AND WE WILL COME BACK WITH MORE INFORMATION AND HOPEFULLY A, UH, A REPORT ON THE, UH, IF THERE'S OUTSIDE, THERE'S DEMOLISH IN THIS HOUSE. 
          OKAY, MR. . 
          THANK YOU. 
          I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. 
          UM, I KNOW YOU SAID THERE'S MORE RESEARCH CERTAINLY ON THE, UH, OWNERS AND THE FAMILY ASSOCIATIONS. 
          UH, WILL YOU ALSO HAVE BETTER INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT ALTERATIONS OR CHANGES HAVE TAKEN PLACE? IT DOES LOOK LIKE, UH, PERHAPS SOME OF THESE, UH, ELEMENTS MAY HAVE BEEN CHANGED OR ALTERED, UH, OVER TIME, PARTICULARLY AROUND THE GARAGE AREA. 
          YES, WE'LL DO THAT SET. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, WE, UH, WE'LL CERTAINLY OPEN THIS TO A PRESENTATION OR CONVERSATION WITH THE OWNER OR THE OWNER'S AVAILABLE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO PLEASE, UH, IDENTIFY YOURSELF. 
          HELLO COMMISSIONERS. 
          UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING. 
          MY NAME IS MARK ORENBURG. 
          I'M THE PRINCIPAL OF DICK CLARK AND ASSOCIATES. 
          WE ARE THE ARCHITECTURE FIRM REPRESENTING THE PROJECT DEVELOPERS AND THE CURRENT OWNERS OF THE HOUSE AT 2,500 ROSEWOOD, CHARLES AND BRENDA SHEPHERD. 
          MRS. SHEPHERD IS THE DAUGHTER OF BERTRAM, BERTRAND AND HAZEL POOLE ADAMS. THE ORIGINAL OWNERS OF THIS HOUSE, UH, BRENDA AND CHARLES HAVE SUBMITTED A LETTER OF SUPPORT AND D OF DEMOLITION. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO READ A SHORT QUOTE FROM THAT LETTER. 
          NOW THAT I THINK IS ENCAPSULATING THEIR FEELING ABOUT THE HOUSE. 
          WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THE POTENTIAL HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF THIS PROPERTY. 
          WHILE WE ARE PROUD OF OUR FAMILY HISTORY, WE BELIEVE THAT OUR FAMILY'S LEGACY IS NOT TIED TO THIS PROPERTY. 
          OUR FAMILY LEGACY WILL LIVE ON IN THE LIVES OF THE MANY CHILDREN AND ADULTS WHO WERE TOUCHED BY MY FATHER'S TEACHINGS. 
          WE HAVE DISCUSSED ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION. 
          HOWEVER, THE EXISTING HOUSE SITS LENGTHWISE ACROSS FOUR LOTS TO MAKE UP THE PROPERTY JUST ABOUT DEAD CENTER. 
          SO BUILDING AROUND THE HOUSE IS REALLY IMPOSSIBLE. 
          THE HOUSE IS LONG, LOW SLAB ON GRADE STRUCTURE THAT MAKES MOVING THE HOUSE AS ONE PIECE IMPOSSIBLE AS WELL. 
          THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THIS HOUSE SITS IS OWN C S M U. 
          OUR PLAN IS TO DEVELOP A MIXED USE HOUSING PROJECT WITH AT LEAST 10 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. 
          OUR GOAL WILL BE TO PROVIDE QUALITY HOUSING FOR THOSE IN THE ROSEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE MORE TIME TO EVALUATE THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF BRENDA'S PARENTS AND HAVE REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT TO THE DECEMBER 13TH MEETING. 
          WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO OBLIGE. 
          I LOOK FORWARD TO BEING IN FRONT OF YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, MR. THORNBURG, THANK YOU. 
          THEY MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY QUESTIONS? UH, WE'LL CLARIFY, BY THE WAY, IT'S, UH, IT WAS ORIGINALLY THOUGHT TO BE THE 13TH IS ACTUALLY DECEMBER 17TH IS OUR NEXT MEETING. 
          JUST, I THINK I'VE GOT THAT RIGHT NOW. 
          UH, ASSUMING THAT WE, WE, UH, PICK UP THAT REQUEST. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS WISH TO SPEAK? UH, OH, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. 
          HAVE YOU, EXCUSE ME. 
          UM, DID YOU INDICATE THAT THE ATOMS ARE STILL THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY OR HAVE THEY ACTUALLY HAD A PURCHASE ALREADY? UM, IT HAS NOT BEEN PURCHASED THERE, THE CURRENT OWNERS OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY. 
          AND SHE IS THE DAUGHTER OF THE ORIGINAL, UM, COUPLE THAT BUILT THE HOUSE. 
          YEAH. 
          SO THE FAMILY IS THE OWNERS AND THEY ARE THE ONES WHO, UH, ARE INDICATING THEY'RE CORRECT. 
          UH, THEY WOULD BE PROTESTING HISTORIC ZONING. 
          OKAY. 
          APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, AS I SAID, ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS MOTION, PLEASE COME TO THE DYES. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          MR. COOK AND COMMISSIONER LITTLE SECONDS. 
          UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. 
          UH, I SEE NANA MISS THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, WHAT WAS YOUR PLEASURE? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. 
          I'LL MOVE 
          [01:55:01]
TO POSTPONE TO THE DECEMBER 17TH MEETING TO FURTHER EVALUATE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BURTON HAZEL ADAMS, AS WELL AS ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S THE MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER LITTELL. 
          IS THERE A SECOND, MR. MCWHORTER SECONDS, THE MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER LITTLE, UH, I APPRECIATE HEARING FROM THE OWNERS AND FROM THE CLARK AND ASSOCIATES ABOUT THEIR WILLINGNESS TO POSTPONE THIS CASE. 
          I THINK IT'S, I'VE SEEN THIS PROPERTY BEFORE WALKING PAST IT AND ALWAYS BEEN VERY, IT'S AN UNUSUAL HOUSE. 
          UM, IT'S DEFINITELY HAD SOME CHANGE OVER TIME AND IT'S A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I WOULD LOVE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT BERTRAND AND HAZEL POOL, UM, AND TO BE ABLE TO FULLY EVALUATE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY. 
          BUT I FEEL LIKE AT THIS POINT I'M NOT REALLY EQUIPPED MAKE A DECISION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ABOUT HISTORIC ZONING. 
          OKAY. 
          MR. MCWHORTER, FURTHER COMMENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MOTION, WHICH IS THE MOTION TO POSTPONE TILL THE NEXT MEETING? I'LL JUST COMMENT THAT I DO THINK THE, UH, SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH ON THE ARCHITECTURE IS WARRANTED. 
          UH, I, I THINK THERE ARE ELEMENTS THAT I FIND RATHER INTERESTING. 
          AND IT'S, IT'S GOING TO BE INTERESTING TO FIND OUT IF THEY'RE JUST QUIRKY FROM THE TIME OR WHETHER IT WAS SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND WE'RE NOT SEEING EXACTLY WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PUT TOGETHER IN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. 
          SO, UH, I THINK I'M, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT STORY BEING TOLD, SO, ALL RIGHT. 
          AND I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          SO LET ME CALL THE QUESTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO POSTPONE TO THE DECEMBER 17TH, INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL OPPOSED. 
          MOTION CARRIES AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS. 
          UH, WE WILL SEE YOU, UH, MR. THORNBURG, UH, THE NEXT NEXT MEETING. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT GETS US UP TO THE, UM, 
          [4.A. Discussion and Possible Action on Committee Reports]
COMMISSION AND STAFF ITEMS, INCLUDING, UH, DISCUSSIONS FROM THE COMMITTEES, UH, AND POSSIBLE ACTIONS ON COMMITTEE REPORTS. 
          UH, AM I CORRECT? IS THAT RIGHT? THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, ANY REPORTS ON THAT COMMISSIONER? COULD, COULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT? UH, I COULD, IF I PULL UP ORIGIN TO FAST ENOUGH, UH, WE HAD SEVERAL CASES. 
          WE HAD SEVERAL CASES ON OUR AGENDA, UM, THAT CAME BEFORE US. 
          ONE OF THEM BEING THE 1601 CEDAR STREET, UM, THAT HAS NOW, UM, THE AFRICANS HAVE NOW WITHDRAWN THE, UM, REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION. 
          UM, THE, ANOTHER WAS THE BUILDING THAT I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER I'M SAD MISTOOK FOR THE LAST BUILDING, THAT THE TWO STORY, UH, GALLERIES ON IT. 
          UM, AND THEY CAME AND, AND BROUGHT SOME SUBSTANTIAL, UH, CHANGES TO THEIR DESIGN, UM, FOR THAT BUILDING. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER COOK? ANYTHING TO ADD? UH, NO. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, LET'S SEE. 
          I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S BEEN AN OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, OR GRANTS COMMITTEE? UH, THE PRESERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE WE'VE BEEN VERY ACTIVE, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER BALANCE WAY LOW. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE AN UPDATE? SURE. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SO WE MET, UH, LEAVE ON THE, WHAT IS THE DATE NOVEMBER 3RD. 
          AND WE WENT OVER THE DRAFT VISION STATEMENT FOR THE PLAN, UH, PREPARED FOR THE, FROM THE WORKING GROUP AND COMMENT ON THAT. 
          UH, WE ALSO SPENT A MAJORITY OF OUR TIME, UH, REVIEWING AND COMMENTING ON THE DRAFT, THE FIRST SET OF DRAFT DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE COME TO US. 
          SO REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE WORK THAT THE WORKING GROUP IS COMPLETING, UM, AND JUST REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE DIRECTION THAT IT'S TAKING. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          WELL, MORE GOOD STUFF TO COME. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          AND, UH, AND THANK STAFF AND, UH, THANK THE MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION, UH, COMMISSIONER RIGHTS, NOT HERE, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER COOK, UH, FOR, UH, THE LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION. 
          IT'S, UH, SOME HEAVY LIFTING, WE'RE OPENING UP A LOT OF NEW AVENUES, UH, THAT AREN'T TRADITIONALLY THOUGHT OF AS, UH, PLACES FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, BUT OUR CHARGE IS TO PASS ON TO FUTURE GENERATIONS. 
          AND IT, IT BEHOOVES US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE REALLY, TRULY REPRESENTING WHO WE AS A PEOPLE ARE OF THIS TIME. 
          AND I THINK WE'VE GOT A MUCH, MUCH BROADER COALITION THAT'S HELPING US DO THAT. 
          SO THANK, THANK ALSO TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, UH, WHO ARE, HOPEFULLY THEY'RE LISTENING IN TONIGHT OR WE'LL PASS ON. 
          UH, OUR, OUR THANKS ARE REAL, REAL GRATEFUL FOR THEIR EFFORTS. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, 
          [4.B. 2022 Meeting Dates]
THE LAST REMAINING ITEM IS THE, UH, ANNUAL, UH, SETTING 
          [02:00:01]
OF THE DATES YOU HAVE IN YOUR BACKUP. 
          UH, ITEM FOUR B THE, UH, PROPOSED MEETING DATES FOR, UH, 2022. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE ANY SPECIFIC COMMENTS, BUT I WAS ALERTED BY STAFF THAT, UH, YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY BE AWARE THAT MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28TH IS THE MONDAY AFTER THANKSGIVING NEXT YEAR. 
          AND IT IS PREFERABLE IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO DO THAT THAN TRY TO SQUEEZE IT IN EARLIER IN THE MONTH BECAUSE OF NOTIFICATION, UH, PROBLEMS. IT'S NOT BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE GRINCHES GRINCHES AND, AND MAKE YOU ALL COME BACK RIGHT AFTER THANKSGIVING. 
          UH, CONVERSELY THE, UH, MONDAY, DECEMBER 19TH, UH, THAT IS, UH, MONDAY BEFORE THE CHRISTMAS ON A SUNDAY. 
          BUT, UH, THAT ACTUALLY IS, UH, ONCE AGAIN, PREFERABLE TO OTHER ALTERNATIVES. 
          UH, CERTAINLY THE MONDAY AFTER CHRISTMAS WOULD BE UNLIKE THE ONE AFTER THANKSGIVING, NOT ACCEPTABLE, WE WON'T MEET ON THE 26TH, UH, AT LEAST NOT IF I CAN HAVE A INFLUENCE ON THAT AS WELL. 
          SO, UH, IF THERE'S ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR ANY OTHER, UH, CLARIFICATIONS TO BE MADE, UH, STAFF, UM, JUST WANT TO NOTE ONE, ONE ASPECT, WHICH IS THAT ANYTIME WE ARE NOT MEETING ON THE FOURTH MONDAY OF THE MONTH, THAT CAN PRESENT SOME CHALLENGES WITH SECURING THE MEETING VENUE AS WE EXPERIENCED FOR DECEMBER. 
          UM, SO THAT, UH, IS ANOTHER REASON THAT THE, UH, HAVING THE MEETING ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28TH IS PREFERABLE TO HAVING IT, UM, EARLIER IN THE MONTH. 
          UM, CERTAINLY THE MEETING FOR DECEMBER IS SHIFTED, SHIFTED OFF SCHEDULE. 
          AND SO I'M, I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONERS, I KNOW THIS IS A VERY LONG TIME IN THE FUTURE TO PROJECT OUT, BUT THINKING ABOUT GENERALLY WHAT YOU DO AROUND THE HOLIDAYS, IF THAT IS AN ACCEPTABLE TIME TO MEET, UM, WE, WE ARE BETWEEN TWO CONSTRAINTS IN TERMS OF SETTING MEETING DATES. 
          AND THE END OF THE YEAR IS ALWAYS A CRUNCH WHERE WE'RE MOVING UP A MEETING. 
          AND THEN WE HAVE A VERY LONG GAP UNTIL WE HAVE THE JANUARY MEETING. 
          WE HAVE TO PUT A CASE ON OUR AGENDA WITHIN 60 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF A COMPLETE APPLICATION IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH CODE, UM, THAT GIVES US OUR APPLICATION DEADLINE. 
          AND BETWEEN THAT AND THE MEETING DATE, WE WORK OUT WHAT DEADLINES WE HAVE FOR FEES AND ALSO FOR GETTING NOTIFICATIONS SCHEDULED AND IN OUR SYSTEM AND TIME FOR THOSE TO BE MAILED 11 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE COMMISSION MEETING. 
          SO I'VE GOT A VERY ELABORATE SPREADSHEET. 
          IF, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT DATES, IF, IF Y'ALL, DON'T LIKE THE DATES ARE PROPOSED, WE CAN PLAY WITH DATES AND SEE WHAT THAT DOES. 
          BUT I WILL SAY THAT I'M GOING WITH DECEMBER 19TH RATHER THAN A WEEK PRIOR, WOULD HELP US SIGNIFICANTLY WITH A CRUNCH AROUND THE THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY THAT WE WOULD BE FACING FOR THE APPLICATION AND NOTIFICATION DEADLINES FOR THAT DECEMBER MEETING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          APPRECIATE THAT. 
          AND I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT IN THE EXPLORATION OF ALL THE ALTERNATIVES. 
          UH, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY NOT BE APPARENT WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHERE WE WERE, WE WERE, WE WOULD, WOULD LINED UP ASSUMING THAT WE ALL APPROVE THIS. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS OR DISCUSSION, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DATES AS PROPOSED. 
          OKAY. 
          IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. 
          THE MOTION. 
          OKAY. 
          MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COOK AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BALANCED SUELA SO THAT WE'LL KNOW WHO TO BLAME NEXT YEAR. 
          UH, ALL THOSE, UH, ANY DISCUSSION BY THE WAY. 
          NOPE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE BY SAYING AYE OR RAISING YOUR HAND. 
          UH, I, IT IS UNANIMOUS. 
          UH, THESE ARE THE MEETINGS, A REMINDER TO EVERYONE. 
          OUR NEXT MEETING IS IN FACT, NOT ON A MONDAY AS STAFF HAS NOTED. 
          IT'S DIFFICULT WHEN WE START MOVING THINGS AROUND AND THE DECEMBER 17TH MEETING IS ON A FRIDAY, UH, WILL YOU HAVE SECURED THE COUNCIL CHAMBER? SO IT WILL BE HERE, BUT IT WILL BE AT FOUR O'CLOCK. 
          SO, UH, WE DON'T DO THAT OFTEN, BUT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DEVIATE FROM OUR NORM IN ORDER TO SQUEEZE EVERYTHING IN. 
          SO, UH, APPRECIATE EVERYBODY BEING ABLE TO BE HERE OR MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          I THINK WE'VE COMPLETED THE AGENDA AND I'M DELIGHTED TO SAY THAT IT'S 8 0 5 AND I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          OKAY. 
          CHAIR MEYERS. 
          THAT MOTION HAS ACQUIRES A SECOND. 
          ANY SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COOK, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. 
          AND NO ONE'S OPPOSED. 
          AND WE ARE NOW ADJOURN. 
          SO REAL ROAD DRAG THAT WHEN THAT TRAIN GOES ON, I'M GOING TO MOVE MY HEAD BACK. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.