Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:03]

STAFF.

ARE YOU GUYS READY FOR US TO GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED? AS LONG AS Y'ALL.

ALRIGHT.

[Reading of the Agenda]

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS EMILY REED.

IT'S SIX O'CLOCK ON MAY 18TH.

I'M THE CHAIR OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AND WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.

I WANT TO, I'LL CALL THEM ROLE.

WELL THAT SOUNDS SNAPPY.

JACOB, ANY NIGHTERS HERE? ALEX.

CELIA ABSENT.

UM, I'M NOT GOING TO READ THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA AND LIKE LAST TIME WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS.

UM, IF THAT COULD RESOLVE AN ISSUE BEFORE YOU WANT TO PULL IT FOR DISCUSSION.

UM, THEN WE WILL HAVE, UM, PUBLIC COMMENTS.

THERE ARE SOME FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, UM, FOR THE, FOR SOME FACES THAT ARE NOW DISCUSSION.

AND LIKE LAST TIME WE WILL HEAR FROM ALL OF THOSE FOLKS IN ORDER OF THE AGENDA AND THEN WE WILL OPEN EACH CASE.

UM, THAT IS FOR DISCUSSION.

UM, AND FOLKS CAN STAY ON THE LINE IF THEY WISH TO, UM, BE ABLE TO SPEAK AT THAT TIME.

UM, JUST THESE MISSIONARY, A LITTLE DRYNESS.

UM, OKAY.

AND THEN FOR THOSE GETTING READY TO SPEAK WITH MEGAN ON THE LINE, JUST A REMINDER THAT, UH, YOUR TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

I KNOW IN OUR, IN PERSON MEETINGS WE HAVE A FIVE MINUTE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE FIRST SPEAKER OF EITHER SIDE AND THAT'S GOING TO BE THREE MINUTES FOR EVERYONE WITH NO DONATION.

[Consent Agenda]

SO THE INCENTIVE AGENDA, UM, I'M ASSUMING THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM LAST WEEK.

MMM.

ITEM A ONE 24 OH FOUR RIO GRANDE STREET.

ITEM B TOO.

14.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UH, T TWO 1412 SOUTH CONGRESS, THE THREE 10 18 EDGE FLIP CARROTS.

I'M GOING TO PULL THAT ONE.

AND THEN HE WON THE SIEBEL'S NEED HOUSE AT 18.

OKAY.

SO BASICALLY WHEN THE ITEMS THAT WERE PULLED, THE REMAINING TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE TWO 14, 12 SOUTH CONGRESS AND NO ONE STRIVE AS WELL AS THE, UM, FROM LAST YEAR.

I'M SORRY, THIS IS KARA BERTRAN CALLING.

UM, I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT.

UM, 1300 EAST FOURTH STREET HAS BEEN PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UH, OKAY.

YOU WERE BREAKING UP.

DID YOU SAY 1300? WHAT DID YOU SAY? YEAH, BEFORE THE 1300 EASTBOUND? I'M SORRY.

YES, I DID MISS THAT ONE OUT.

THE TEXACO DEPOT AT UM, 1,313.

OH, TWO EAST FOURTH STREET.

UM, NO, ACTUALLY THAT HAS BEEN COLD.

THAT WAS PULLED BY, UM, SOME PUBLIC.

[00:05:02]

SO THAT IS AN ITEM FOR DISCUSSION.

WAS THAT PULLED BY MR TAMBURELLO OR WAS THERE SOMEONE ELSE? BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE HE WISHES TO SPEAK THERE.

YOU'RE REALLY BREAKING UP, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE LIST THAT WAS PROVIDED TO ME WAS TWO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, DAN ALVAREZ AND TOM WALL.

GREAT, THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, SO NOW WE CAN, UH, YOU'RE FROM FOLKS ON THE LINE ACTUALLY FINISHED THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH A MOTION.

UM, LET'S SEE.

YES, I GUESS WE SHOULD BECAUSE THE LOOKS, WHEN I CAN SEE IT ON A, ON AN ITEM, THEY WOULD HAVE ALREADY HAD TO HAVE SIGNED UP FOR IT.

SO, UM, YES.

SO I'LL NOTE CONSENT ITEMS AS MENTIONED.

I'LL SECOND MOTION.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

THEN I SUPPOSE MOTION PASSES.

ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN.

OKAY.

OKAY.

NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

UM,

[Item 3 B1 (Part 1 of 2)]

THE FIRST ITEM WITH SOMEONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK WAS THE ONE ONE OH SIX FEEDS SIXTH STREET.

I MEAN, I'LL SEE.

WELL HORI I'M SORRY, WHERE IS THAT? WELL, SEE ON THE LINE, I THINK THIS OR SHAWN OR BRIAN, IS IT MY TURN TO SPEAK ABOUT LITTLE FIELD BUILDING? UH, THE NEXT PERSON THAT I HAVE FOUND OUT IS GEORGE.

OKAY.

YES.

IN PLACE OF CHELSEA FOR SEAN.

YOUR FIRST STEP.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH BECAUSE EVERYBODY HAS THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY NOLAN'S STUDIO.

THAT WAS UM, SOMETHING ON FRIDAY THAT'S VERY POSTED TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WEBSITE.

OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT I'M USING AS MY GOODBYE.

SO IF EVERYONE CAN SEE THAT, THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL.

UM, WHAT WE HAVE IS, OKAY.

OKAY.

IT IS A SEVEN PAGE PDF.

SO THE, THE SECOND PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT SHOWS A PHOTO OF THE BUILDING FROM, YEAH, WELL WE THINK OF THE 1920S AND SHOWED THE ORIGINAL FACADE WITH THREE.

YEAH.

DIFFERENT AWNINGS.

THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING IS ON THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING AND THAT AWNING IS RAISED ABOVE ALL OF THE FIRST FLOOR WINDOWS.

AND THEN THERE WERE TWO ADDITIONAL SECONDARY INSURANCES, UH, ON THE CONGRESS SIDE AND ON THE SIXTH STREET SIDE.

AND THOSE AWNINGS ARE SLIGHTLY LOWER AND CREATE A TRANSOM LIGHT ABOVE THEM.

OKAY.

AND THEY'RE ALSO NOTED TO BE VERY DECORATIVE IN THEIR DESIGN.

AND SO WE LOSE THAT.

AND ALSO WE ALSO FOUND A PRECEDENT FROM, IT LOOKS LIKE THE 1958 FACADE REMODEL WHERE THEY HAD AWNINGS ACROSS THE ENTIRE BUILDING AND THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING WAS LARGELY GLAZING AND AT SOME POINT THE BILLING WAS JUST PUT BACK MORE TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION, WHICH IS HOW WE HAVE IT TODAY WITH PUNCHED OPENING WINDOWS.

UM, SO THOSE ARE TWO EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE WERE TO FIND, UH, AS PRECEDENT, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.

SO TODAY WE HAVE OUR MAIN ENTRANCE, UH, WITH AN AWNING OVER IT.

THAT AWNING WAS PUT ON APPROXIMATELY SIX YEARS AGO.

UM, IT'S ON THE SIXTH STREET SIDE.

IT'S THE ONLY AWNING ON THE BUILDING.

WE DON'T HAVE ONE ON THE CORNER AND WE DON'T HAVE ONE FACING CONGRESS.

AND, UM, WE'RE PROPOSING AN AWNING SIMILAR IN STYLE TO THIS, BUT IT WOULD BE LOWER TO DENOTE THAT IT'S A SECONDARY ENTRANCE.

UM, AND IT WOULD, UH, BE JUST TO THE EAST OF THE MAIN BUILDING ENTRANCE AND THAT'S REPRESENTED ON THE LAST TWO PAGES OF THE PRESENTATION.

AND SO WE BELIEVE THAT SINCE IT'S A SECONDARY ENTRANCE, WE'VE LOWERED, UH, THE SCALE OF IT BROUGHT IT DOWN TO CREATE THE TRANSOM WINDOW OVER THE TOP, SIMILAR

[00:10:01]

TO THE ORIGINAL BUILDING.

UH, THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE SECONDARY ENTRANCE IS AND UH, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO MATCH THE EXISTING AWNING SO THAT UM, THERE'S SOME CONTINUITY IN THE APPEARANCE OF THE BUILDING.

AND THAT WAS THE, THE APPROACH THAT WE TOOK FOR PROPOSING THE ADDITION OF THIS AWNING.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ARE WE TAKING QUESTIONS NOW OR DO WE COME BACK FOR QUESTIONS? IF WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE PRESENTER? YES, WE CAN ASK IT NOW.

COULD YOU PLEASE TALK ABOUT THE METHOD OF ATTACHMENT TO THE BUILDING? I KNOW IN THE STAFF REPORT IT MENTIONED THAT THE ATTACHMENT SHOULD BE TO THE MORTAR, BUT THE EXISTING THAT'S THERE IS NOT TO THE MORTAR.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT YOUR METHOD OF ATTACHMENT FOR THE PROPOSED AWNING? OH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

I SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED THAT.

THANK YOU.

UM, WE WOULD PROPOSE, UH, A SIMILAR ATTACHMENT AS THE AWNING THAT'S THERE NOW, WHICH THE CURRENT AWNING IN IT'S CURRENT SIZE ONLY NEEDS FOUR ATTACHMENT POINTS TO AT THE POINT OF THE ACTUAL AWNING AND THEN TWO MORE HIGHER UP ABOVE IT FOR THE STRUCTURAL SUPPORT.

UM, IT'S MINIMALLY INVASIVE TO THE FACADE INSTEAD OF A FULL CONNECTION ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE AWNING, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A FLASHING IN AND A LONGTERM CHANGE TO THE FACADE ITSELF.

IT'S JUST MINIMIZING THE NUMBER OF POINTS.

SO THAT'S REPRESENTED ON THE PITCH SHEET OF THE PDF.

SO OUR NEW AWNING WOULD HAVE MORE THAN THAN THAT EXISTING AWNING, JUST BASED ON THE LENGTH OF IT.

IT'S LIKE ONE, TWO, FOUR, FIVE POINTS WITH AN ASSOCIATED POINT HIGHER THAN, THAN THAT.

SO 10 TOTAL.

OKAY.

SO WILL YOU, YES, WE WOULD USE A SIMILAR ATTACHMENT METHOD.

IS THAT EXISTING RIGHT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

WHERE IF YOU LOOK AT IT, IF I COULD JUST STATE THAT THE FIRST FLOOR ACCORDING TO THE 1958 DRAGS WAS COMPLETELY REMOVED DURING THAT TIMEFRAME IN FAVOR OF FULL GLAZING FACADE.

SO THAT FIRST FLOOR IS NOT THE ORIGINAL FACADE WHILE TRYING TO REPLICATE WHAT WAS THERE IN THE 19 TEENS AT ITS INCEPTION.

IT'S NOT ORIGINAL.

OKAY.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR HIM? OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT SPEAKER.

HI EMILY.

I DON'T THINK GEORGE OR TODD HAVE CALLED IN.

YOU MIGHT WANT TO MOVE FORWARD TO JOEL.

OKAY.

YEAH, I'M HERE.

I'M SORRY.

I JUST SHOWED UP TO BASICALLY SUPPORT WHAT SEAN WAS SAYING AND TO UM, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING EXTRA TO ADD AT THIS POINT.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THE NEXT ITEM WAS SOMEONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK

[Item 3 B4]

FOR 1300.

HI.

HI.

I'M SORRY, UH, CHERRY, THIS IS KARA AGAIN.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ON THE STAFF AND UM, AND ACTUALLY ALL THE SPEAKERS, I'M SORRY, CARRIE, YOU'RE BREAKING UP ALL THE SPEAKERS, BUT ALL THE SPEAKERS WHO SIGNED UP FOR UBER AND MR WALD DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK.

SO IF I DON'T, IF THE COMMISSIONS IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT, I THINK IT COULD BE PASSED ON.

IT COULD BE ADDED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA UNLESS ONE OF THE, UNLESS SOMEONE ON THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IT, WHICH IS ALSO FINE.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IT'S NOT BEING PULLED BY A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT'S BEFORE.

THAT'S CORRECT.

1300 TO 13.

OH TWO EAST FOURTH STREET.

[00:15:02]

OKAY.

DID ANYONE FROM THE COMMISSION WANTS TO PULL THAT ONE? THE TEXACO THOUGH? OKAY.

UM, SHALL I WILL MOVE THAT WE ADD THAT ITEM TO THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM BEFORE 3,000 TO 1302 EAST FOURTH STREET.

OKAY.

AND GAVE MR ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE.

ALL OF THOSE, THE MOTION PASSES SEVEN ZERO.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION ON OUR END.

OKAY, SO

[Item 3 C1]

OUR NEXT CASE WITH A SEIZURE IS UM, C1 90 TO 92 RAINY STREET AND OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS AMANDA SCORE.

HI CARE.

AMANDA SWORE HERE.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

UM, I'M REALLY JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

IF THERE ARE ANY DURING DISCUSSION AND JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I THINK THAT FOR ALL OF THEIR WORK AND RESEARCH THROUGHOUT THIS PROJECT.

ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HER? UM, PERSON NELSON IS PERSON ON THE LINE.

YES, I'M HERE.

I'M LIKEWISE JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU TO THE COMMISSION.

UH,

[Item 3 D1 (Part 1 of 2)]

MOVING ON TO D ONE SIX OH ONE WEST 26TH STREET.

WE HAVE SCOTT BURNS.

YES.

HI, GOOD AFTERNOON.

SCOTT BURNS FOR LINCOLN VENTURES.

UM, WE ARE RESPONDING ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER WITH RESPECT TO THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.

UH, THIS IS A FOLLOWUP TO OUR MEETING LAST MONTH, UH, AND REALLY WANTED TO, UH, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT MAY HAVE TRANSPIRED OVER THE LAST MONTH.

UM, AS WELL AS JUST REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT, UM, THIS PROJECT, UM, WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT AND IN LARGE PART WE'RE EXCITED BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING IN A LOT OF AFFORDABILITY TO THE AREA.

UM, AS A RESULT OF THIS APPLICATION SPECIFICALLY, UH, WE'RE LOOKING TO BRING OVER 80 BEDS, AMBER, 22 UNITS, UM, THAT WILL PROVIDE SMART HOUSING IN THIS SPECIFIC AREA.

AND WITH THAT SAID, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN THAT THE COUNCIL MAY HAVE.

OKAY.

THEY ALL GIVE THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS MINUTE TO THINK ABOUT THAT.

WELL, UM, I APOLOGIZE THAT THERE WERE SOME FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR, UM, BUT ONLY IF THE ITEM WAS PULLED AND THEY DID GET HOLD BY, UM, THE COMMISSION.

SO THAT WAS ITEM A ONE AND ITEM B THREE.

SO I WILL CIRCLE BACK TO YOU GUYS IF YOU'RE STILL ON THE LINE, UM, TO HEAR YOUR COMMENTS AFTER WE FINISHED WITH, UH, D ONE AND APOLOGIES FOR STICKING UP FOR YOU.

OKAY.

DOES THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BURNS? ALRIGHTY.

THANK YOU.

UM, IS NICOLE FIERRO ON THE LINE? HI, THIS IS TAYLOR MCENTIRE AND NICOLE FRO.

YEAH.

OKAY.

UM, SO WE JUST WANTED TO, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU GUYS FOR ALLOWING US TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF OUR BELOVED BUILDING THAT WE HAD CALLED HOME FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS OF OUR UNDERGRADUATE CAREER AT UT.

THIS BUILDING HAS IN FACT OFFERED COMFORT AND SOLACE, UT STUDENTS AND FACULTY SINCE 1957 AND IF WE DID THE COMMITTEE TO ALLOW THIS HISTORIC BUILDING TO CONTINUE TO SERVE THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY AS A PIECE OF HISTORY CONNECTING WEST CAMPUS TO ITS ROOTS, LIVING IN AN HISTORIC BUILDING SUCH AS THE OLD GROCERY STORE HAS GIVEN MY ROOMMATE AND MYSELF, NICOLE AND I, UM, A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO WITNESS THE POSITIVE IMPACT IT'S HAD ON THE COMMUNITY.

JUST LAST WEEK, I FOUND NO LESS THAN THREE SETS OF PEOPLE PHOTOGRAPHING THEMSELVES IN FRONT OF THE HISTORIC SIGNAGE AND FACADE.

EXCUSE ME.

YES.

SO WE'LL SLOW DOWN.

UM, SO LAST WEEK I DID SEE THREE SETS OF PEOPLE PHOTOGRAPHING THEMSELVES IN FRONT OF THE HISTORIC SIGNAGE AND FACADE OF THE BUILDING.

AND WHEN I SPOKE TO EACH OF THESE GROUPS OF PEOPLE AND TALKED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF IMPENDING DESTRUCTION RESULT, THE RESULTS TO TEAR IT DOWN, THEY ALL EXPRESS DEEP SADNESS AT THE IDEA THAT YET ANOTHER IMPORTANT HISTORIC BUILDING WOULD BE TURNED DOWN TO BE REPLACED BY ANOTHER LARGE SCALE APARTMENT COMPLEX.

UM, SIXTIES, THE 2019 AFFORDABLE RENT FIGURE WHEN COMPARED TO EVERY APARTMENT IN THE VICINITY WITH THE MAJORITY OF

[00:20:01]

WHICH STAND AT OVER A THOUSAND DOLLARS PER MONTH PLUS PARKING AND UTILITIES.

THE FIGURE IS FAR LOWER AND IS WHAT A LOT OF MY ROOMMATE AND MYSELF TO LIVE NEAR CAMPUS, WHICH IS A REALLY IMPORTANT PART OF STUDENT LIFE.

I DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED REASON OUR BUILDING SHADE QUALIFY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE HISTORIC AND THAT COMMISSION AGAINST DEMOLITION ON THE BASIS OF THE VALUE IT ADDS TO THE COMMUNITY.

THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY ENLIGHTENING AS WE DROVE INTO THE PAST OF THE PLACE WE CALL THESE CALLED HOME FOR THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE DISCOVERED THE SAME BORNE MAP FROM 19 HUNDREDS OF PICKING AN OLD GROCERY STORE AT HER OLD ADDRESS ON 26TH AND FOURTH STREET BEFORE WORD BECAME THE RACISM AND THE RACIST BECAME SEATING WITH HELP FROM A HISTORIC BUILDING DEFENDER FRIEND OF OURS.

WE READ THE STORIES ABOUT OUR BUILDINGS, PAST SLICES OF GROCERY STORE BEFORE IT BECAME A HOME TO MYSELF, MY ROOMMATE, AND THREE OTHER TENANTS.

I SPOKE WITH HISTORY BUFFS AROUND THE STATE WHO HEARD ABOUT OUR CASE FROM THE PETITION.

MY ROOMMATE AND MYSELF STARTED TO SHOW THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR THE SALVATION OF THIS BUILDING, WHICH ARE THE RECORD AS OF ABOUT 3:00 PM TODAY HAD OVER 500 SUPPORTERS.

WE SPOKE WITH PEOPLE WHO SHARED RESOURCES, MAPS FROM THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS AND STARTED ABOUT VISITING THEIR FRIENDS.

AND IT'S VERY BUBBLING IN THEIR TIME AS UNDERGRADS AT UT.

I PLEAD TO YOU IS THIS, DON'T, DON'T WANT THIS BUILDING THAT HAS FAITHFULLY SERVED THE UT AND GREATER AUSTIN COMMUNITY AND ALL THE HISTORY HERE AND BE REDUCED TO RUBBLE.

THAT'S CONSIDERED DENYING A PETITION FOR DEMOLITION AND ALLOW THE OLD GROCERY STORE TO REMAIN AN IMPORTANT HISTORIC BUILDING.

BUT HE TEASED STUDENTS AND ALSO I STILL LIKE THANKS AND HOOK THEM.

AND DO YOU GET ANY QUESTIONS? HELLO? OKAY.

UH, SCOTT BURNS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND.

UM, NO THANK YOU.

EXACT CORRECT STUFF OR IF WE HAVE A ROBOTIC PROCEDURE.

UM, I'M NOT SURE IF ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO JUMP IN.

NO, GO AHEAD.

CARE.

YEAH, I THINK THAT AFTER ALL OF THE, ANY OTHER SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION, I WOULD LET THEM SPEAK.

UM, AND THEN ALLOW THE APPLICANT THREE MINUTES TO, UH, TO READ.

YES.

OKAY.

APOLOGIES.

MR. BURNS, WE WILL ALLOW A REBUTTAL AND UM, OKAY.

WOMEN WHO JUST GO FOR THE LAST FOLKS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.

SO IF YOU'RE STILL THERE, YOU CAN MAKE YOUR STATEMENT.

YES.

THANK YOU.

UH, I JUST WANTED TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY NOT A HISTORICALLY DESIGNATED SITE.

UM, I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL HAD RECEIVED THE OWNERS, UM, A DESIRE TO NOT HAVE THE UH, PROPERTY, UM, MADE A HISTORIC SITE AND THIS IS THE SAME OWNER THAT HAS OWNED THE PROPERTY, UM, SINCE I BELIEVE THE 1960S.

UM, AND THEN JUST WITH RESPECT TO AFFORDABILITY, UM, I JUST WANTED TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT, UM, WHILE THERE MIGHT BE FOUR REASONABLY PRICED BEDS AT THE CURRENT SITE, WHICH, UM, I WOULD NOTE ARE ABOVE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, LEVEL, UM, THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WILL PROVIDE, UM, CLOSE TO 80 BEDS IN THAT STEAD.

SO, UM, FROM AN AFFORDABILITY STANDPOINT, UM, I SEE THIS AND WE SEE THIS AS A POSITIVE FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE AREA.

THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR HIM? I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT.

UM, YEAH, I'M AMAZED THAT THOSE IN OPPOSITION WERE ABLE TO GET 500 PEOPLE TO SIGN ON THEIR PETITION AND I COMMEND THEM FOR THEIR SUPPORTIVE PROBATION.

[Item 3 A1 (Part 1 of 2)]

UH, SO NOW WE'RE GOING FLIP IT BACK TO ITEM .

OTHER, UH, TAPING IS ON THE LINE AND WITH LIKE, YES.

UM, THIS IS HOW THEY'RE CHATTING WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT.

I AM THE CASE MANAGER FOR THE PARKER HOUSE CASE, WHICH IS 24 OH FOUR RIO GRANDE STREET.

IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED, G O

[00:25:01]

H M.

P FOR THE FRONT PORTION OF THE TRACKS AND EACH MP OR THE TRACK, I'M CALLING THEM TRACK ONE AND TRACK TWO.

SO THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE APARTMENT WHERE THE BUILDING IS TO G, R N U H N.

P AND THEN HAVE THE REAR OF THE TRACK GO TO G.

R.

N.

U.

N.

P.

IT'S ABOUT 0.3 ACRES.

I BELIEVE YOU GUYS ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE.

LET ME ALL DOWN.

UM, AND THERE MY ISSUES SECTION I POINT OUT THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REMOVE THE H DESIGNATION FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY ONLY TO ALLOW REDEVELOPMENT OF THAT AREA.

CURRENTLY THERE IS H DESIGNATION ON THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, UM, AND THEY DO INTEND TO KEEP THE H DESIGNATION WHERE THE PARKER HOUSE OR BUILDING IS LOCATED.

UH, THIS WILL ALLOW COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES WITH HAVING THE MIXED USE DESIGNATION.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED OF COURSE BETWEEN 24TH AND 25TH STREET ON THE WEST SIDE OF RIO GRANDE.

IT'S IN THE OUTER WEST CAMPUS SUB DISTRICT CAMPUS UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OR WHAT I HEARD FROM THE WEST UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AREA.

UH, THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AS I SAID, TRACKS ONE IS CURRENTLY OFFERED AND HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN USE.

THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY IS S H M P AND IT'S CURRENTLY USED FOR PARKING AREA.

THERE IS A GARAGE AND THE GARAGE APARTMENT SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY IS A FRATERNITY HOUSE AND A CONVENIENCE BUSINESS.

AND C.

S M P WEST OF THE PROPERTY IS MULTIFAMILY, THEN HUGHES AND M.

P NORTH OF THE PROPERTY IS A MULTIFAMILY AREA WITH A MIX OF M S AND P L O N P D L M P AND M S AND P ACROSS RIO GRANDE TO THE EAST OF PROPERTIES.

THEN M AND P C S M P AND CS ONE MP.

THERE'S A SORORITY HOUSE AND MULTI-FAMILY LAND USES.

OKAY.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REMOVE THE H FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THE PARKING AND APARTMENT UNIT ARE LOCATED.

SINCE THIS AREA DOESN'T CONTAIN ANY STRUCTURES OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE THAT SUPPORTS THAT ASPECT OF THE REQUEST AND AGAIN THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PRESERVING H DESIGNATION ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

THE RECOMMENDATION IS THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN THE MS AND THE G RIGHT NOW DO NOT REFLECT THIS DISTANCE, SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS THAT THE BRAKE LINE OF WHERE THE H EXISTS BE 15 FEET OFF OF THE REAR OF THE PARKER HOUSE TO ALLOW IT TO BE WERE MADE FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.

I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO STEVE SADOSKY.

HE CAN GO OVER THE COMMENTS FROM MRS PRESERVATION OFFICE.

OH, I THINK WE, UM, MAYBE GOT A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER THERE.

I HAD SEEN THIS HAPPEN AS, UH, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, UM, AND DIDN'T REALIZE THAT SHE WAS THE CASE MANAGER ON THE CASE.

UM, SO WE'VE JUST GOTTEN A LITTLE PREVIEW OF OUR FIRST DISCUSSION ITEMS. I DID WANT TO CIRCLE BACK TO, UM,

[Item 3 B3 (Part 1 of 2)]

FROM, UH, B3 IF THERE'S ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE STILL ON THE LINE THAT WANTED TO OFFER THEIR COMMENTS ON THAT, UH, SINCE IT WAS PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.

HI, DAN WILLIAMS IS THE FIRST PERSON THAT WAS SIGNED UP.

OKAY.

YES, I AM A PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT.

I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT AND I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

UH, YES, TERRY, MR. MEYERS.

RIGHT.

I PULLED THAT ITEM, UM, BECAUSE THERE WEREN'T PHOTOGRAPHS OR DRAWINGS OR ANY REPRESENTATION OF THE PICTURE WINDOW THAT'S PREFERS TO REPLACE THE HISTORIC OPENINGS.

AND, UM, I WONDERED IF YOU COULD COMMENT ON THAT.

I UH, I HAVE SOME OBJECTIONS TO THAT, BUT MAYBE WHEN IT COMES UP ON YOUR AGENDA, SORRY.

[00:30:02]

COULD BE, SHOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

ARE YOU STILL ON THE LINE? ME, MEL.

LAUREN? YES.

OH YES, I'M ON MINE.

WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? WE DIDN'T GET ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OR IMAGES OR DRAWINGS OR SPECS OF THE CHANGES.

SPECIFICALLY THE CHANGE ON THE NORTH ELEVATION, UH, FROM EXISTING WINDOW OPENINGS TO THE LARGE PICTURE WINDOW.

ALRIGHT.

OVER IN YOUR BACKUP.

THEY SHOULD BE ON THE SECOND PAGE OF THE PLAN.

UM, YEAH, I'M GOING TO LET HECTOR TALK TO THAT.

HE, UH, HE WOULD KNOW.

LET ME GET HECTOR, WHOEVER ALLOWS HER HIM TO SPEAK.

UM, HE CAN TELL YOU AND NAVIGATE YOU TO WHATEVER DRAWING, UH, WE NEED BUT THAN NOT.

HI, THIS IS PROJECT MANAGER.

UM, AND THE DRAWING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, SORRY, CAN'T HEAR YOU AT ALL.

OH, I'M SORRY.

UH, I HOPE THIS IS BETTER.

UM, THE DRAWING, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS, UM, ON PAGE 13 AND THAT WILL BE A DRAWING TITLED E N DASH TWO OH TWO THAT, UH, DRAWING CORRESPONDS WITH THE NORTH HOUSE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE NORTH ELEVATION AT THE BOTTOM.

THE BOTTOM DRAWING IS THE NORTH ELEVATION.

UM, AS YOU KNOW, OR AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, UH, THE NORTH ELEVATION WAS, UH, UM, THERE WAS KIND OF A SINGLE DOOR THAT LED OUT FROM, FROM THE NORD HOUSE ON TO, UH, UH, BACK GARDENS.

AND SO WE WERE KIND OF REVISING THAT ELEVATION SO THAT IT FUNCTIONS AND IT CONNECTS THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE WITH, UH, WITH A NEW TERRORISTS, UH, BEHIND THE HOUSE.

UM, SO THE RATIONALE FOR THE REDESIGN HERE IS TO KIND OF OPEN UP THAT ELEVATION THAT ISN'T VISIBLE FROM THE STREET IN ANY WAY.

AND, UM, AND HE REALLY PROVIDES THAT CONNECTION TO THE TERRORISTS AND KIND OF ALLOWS THE INSIDE SPACE KIND OF FLOOR OUT AND REALLY PROVIDE THOSE DRAMATIC VIEWS TO DOWNTOWN.

SO THE STRATEGY HERE WAS TO KIND OF RESTORE THE REMAINING, UM, KIND OF BRICK WORK UP TO THAT POINT.

AND THEN IN SORT OF KIND OF A SERIES OF THREE, UH, LARGER OPENINGS THAT KIND OF CONTRAST THE EXISTING HISTORIC, UH, DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE.

OKAY.

UM, SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT.

IF WE, IF WE CAN GET TO THAT, UM, DRAWING A N DASH TWO OH TWO.

OKAY.

YES.

GREAT.

I CAN'T ACCESS THAT BACKUP WHILE I'M IN THIS MEETING, BUT UM, I PULLED IT, I THINK THAT I WOULD LIKE THE COMMISSION TO REVISIT THAT AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT WHEN IT COMES UP ON THE AGENDA.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE ON THE LINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO ITEM B THREE PERHAPS? CAMERON CAMPBELL? OH YES.

THIS IS CAMERON CAMPBELL, A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ON NORWOOD PROJECT AND UM, JUST I AM A PROPONENT FOR THE PROJECT AND I'M HAPPY TO HELP ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE TERRACE.

HECTOR SPOKE TO, UM, THE INDOOR OUTDOOR CONNECTION ON THE MORE SIDE, UM, AS WELL AS ANYTHING RELATED TO THE GROUNDS OF THE MARIJUANA STATE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM? AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT SUSAN BENZ SIGNED UP AS WELL.

HELLO.

I'M THIS ADVANCED WITH BENZ RESOURCE GROUP PROJECT MANAGEMENT, WORKING WITH THE NORWOOD PARK FOUNDATION.

I SIGNED UP IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT.

I DO THINK WE SHOULD ASK COLEEN PERIO

[00:35:01]

TO SPEAK BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN BEFORE THIS, THIS, UM, COMMITTEE BEFORE AND HAD SOME GREAT CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE NORTH FACADE.

MIGHT BE USEFUL FOR YOUR DELIBERATIONS.

OKAY.

IT'S CALLING ON THE LINE.

YOU MAY NOT BE ON THE LINE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

WELL, HELLO, I'M HERE.

THAT'S GOOD.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

PAULINE.

DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK? OKAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF SHE WANTED TO SPEAK.

HELLO? CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? YES MA'AM.

GO AHEAD.

OKAY, WONDERFUL.

UM, YES, I'M CALLING TERRIO.

I'M PRESIDENT OF NORWOOD PARK FOUNDATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT NORTH FACADE.

UH, TWO YEARS AGO WE DID VISIT WITH THE REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE COMMISSION TO GO OVER THAT PARTICULAR WALL BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN GROSSLY, UM, ALTERED IN THE 1960S AND SEVENTIES.

AND IN ORDER TO, UH, HAVE THE INGRESS AND EGRESS THAT WE NEEDED FOR THE TERRORISTS, UH, WE, WE HAVE CHOSEN TO PUT THE PICTURE WINDOW AND THE DOORS TO HAVE THE BEAUTIFUL VIEW OUT TO THE TERRACE AND THE INGRESS AND EGRESS THAT WE NEED FOR SAFETY AND, AND, AND TRAFFIC PURPOSES.

AND THAT LANGUAGE, WE SPECIFICALLY ASKED IF THE LANGUAGE ON THAT WALL COULD BE CHANGED BECAUSE IT IS ALL, IT'S AN ENTIRELY NEW WALL.

UM, AND WE WERE GIVEN THE APPROVAL TO DO THAT.

SO THOSE WINDOWS AND DOORS ARE PURPOSEFULLY, UH, DIFFERENT.

THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE SO THAT EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THEY ARE NOT THE HISTORIC WINDOWS AND DOORS.

SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE, UM, I CAN ANSWER.

I'M, I'M VERY HAPPY TO.

I'M HAPPY TO BE BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND I THANK YOU ALL FOR, FOR YOUR WORK WITH US OVER THE YEARS ON THIS.

YOUR QUESTIONS FOR HER.

OKAY.

I JUST MAKE SURE I REALIZE, ONLY DO ABSTAIN ON THAT PARTICULAR ITEM.

OKAY.

AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT OUR PROCEDURE IS.

I THINK THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE SOME FOLLOWUP.

I DON'T IF STAFF COULD ASSIST ME.

OKAY.

SO THAT'S ITEM, UM, THE UH, B3 RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY.

UM, WHEN WE GET TO THAT CASE, YOU DID STEP OFF THE DIME.

YES.

WILL WE BE ABLE TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON THAT ITEM? I GUESS WE WILL HAVE QUORUM, IS THAT CORRECT? THERE'S SIX OF US, RIGHT? YES.

OKAY.

I STILL HAVE CONCERNS AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN IT COMES UP IN THE MEETING.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ON A COMMITTEE AT THE TIME THIS CAME FORWARD, BUT I HAVE STRONG FEELINGS AND RESERVATIONS ABOUT IT.

OKAY.

UM, I WAS GOING TO MOVE TO OUR FIRST DISCUSSION ITEM, BUT ACTUALLY I HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF IF WE NEED TO.

UM, OR IF I NEED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONSENT ITEMS. PB COMMISSIONERS STAYED CLOSE, THE PUBLIC PUBLIC AREA FOR CONSENT.

OKAY.

UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OBJECTIONS FROM THE, AND I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONSENT ITEMS.

[Item 3 A1 (Part 2 of 2)]

OKAY.

AND WE WILL MOVE TO OUR FIRST DISCUSSION ITEM A ONE.

OKAY.

UM, WE ALREADY HEARD FROM UM, MS CHAFFIN, UM,

[00:40:01]

WAS JUST CONFIRMING THAT THAT WAS OKAY.

YOUR PRESENTATION THERE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD OR WE CAN MOVE ON TO STEVE'S PORTION OF THE DISCUSSION PROBABLY ABOUT THAT.

THAT'S THE CONCLUSION OF MY PRESENTATION, BUT I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO DISCUSS THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ASPECTS.

OKAY.

SO GOOD EVENING COMMERCIALLY.

UH, THIS WAS AN INTERESTING CASE BECAUSE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, UH, THEY HAVE COME UP WITH VARIOUS PROPOSALS TO ADD, ADD SOME VALUE TO THIS PROPERTY.

AND AS YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER, ONE PROPOSAL INCLUDED MOVING THE HOUSE FORWARD.

UM, BUT THEN WE SETTLED ON A, ON A CONCEPT OF BUILDING A BUILDING ON THE TRACK THAT'S PROPOSED FOR THE REMOVAL OF H LOANING AND B APPLICANT WORKED WITH THE COMMISSION ON THE DESIGN OF THAT BUILDING.

UH, AND UH, WE FILLED THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR IT.

OKAY.

I BELIEVE THAT WENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

SO, UH, REMOVING THE HISTORIC ZONING AT THIS POINT TROUBLES A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE THERE'S NOW NO GUARANTEE OF WHAT WILL GO BACK THERE AND THE COMMISSION BY REMOVING THE HISTORIC ZONING WILL LOSE CONTROL OVER ANYTHING THAT'S BEHIND THE HISTORIC HOUSE.

SO THAT BASICALLY IS THE CONCERN THAT STAFF WANTED TO COMMUNICATE TO YOU.

UH, ON THE OTHER HAND, THERE WAS A 15 FOOT BUFFER, WHICH IS WHAT WE GENERALLY REQUIRE AROUND HISTORIC BUILDINGS TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY AND STAFF GROUP SO THAT IF THE COMMISSION FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT 15 FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN THE BACK OF THE HISTORIC BUILDING AND ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION, THEN THE COMMISSION SHOULD APPROVE OR RECOMMEND THIS ZONING CHANGE.

HOLD ON JUST A SECOND.

I HAVE TO GET MY DOG OUT.

YES.

IS THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE STUFF APPROPRIATE NOTICE THAT WAS BRANDED FOR THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION STILL? ANY FACT? YES, IT WOULD NEVER CHANGE.

THE APPROVAL WOULD NEVER EXPIRE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT CAME UP AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE WANTED TO MAINTAIN OR RETAIN THE HISTORIC ZONING WAS THAT THE BUILDING GRAVITATED FROM THE BACK OF THE LOT AND REACHED INTO THE HISTORIC ZONE PORTION OR INTO THE LAND THAT THE HISTORIC HOUSE SITS ON.

AND I THINK THAT'S STILL A CONCERN.

KEEPING THAT ANCIENT ZONING, UM, ALLOWS US SOME CONTROL OVER WHAT GETS BUILT AND HOW MUCH OF IT REACHES INTO THE HISTORIC PORTION.

UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UM, ON THE APPLICANT? YEAH, I'M TRYING FROM THE BACKUP TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHERE THE LINE IS AND WHAT KIND OF GEOMETRY IS THAT REMAINING BACK PORTION.

AND, UH, I'M NOT QUICK ENOUGH AT GOOGLE MAPS TO GET OVER THERE AND I DON'T HAVE A CITY, UH, GIS MAPPING MY LIKE DISPOSAL.

SO WE'RE VERY, UH, LARGE SCALE, UH, ZOOMED OUT PLANS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO US.

DON'T REALLY SHOW THEM WHAT THE DEPTH OF THE BINDER IS.

HOW, HOW BIG IS THE LOT THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING? UH, THE REMOVAL FOR HEATHER PLANNING.

I DON'T HAVE THE CALCULATIONS IF

[00:45:01]

WE DIVIDE IT AS ATTRACTIVE WOMEN TRACK TOO.

I DON'T HAVE THE CALCULATIONS FOR THAT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DETERMINED YET.

THE BREAKS BETWEEN, JUST AS A ROUGH MEASUREMENT, I'D SAY IT'S ABOUT THE FRONT 60%, THE GEO AND THE REAR 40% IS THE MULTI FAMILY WITH THE H.

AND THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

SO THE PROPERTY LINE RUNS RIGHT UP TO OR, OR CLOSE TO THE EDGE OF THE ADJACENT, UH, NON HISTORIC BUILDING, WHICH LOOKS LIKE IT'S BUILT CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE SOUTH.

UM, I'M NOT SURE, UH, REGARDING THAT.

UM, PART OF WHAT WE'RE DETERMINING IS WITH THIS MEETING FOCUSING ON THE VISION OF WHERE THE SETBACK WOULD BE IF THE AGE, IF THE AGE WAS REMOVED, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE 15 FOOT CHANGE TO BE THE OTHER DIRECTION.

AND MS JASON, MAYBE YOU CAN CLARIFY TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY.

IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS, THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THAT RUNS FROM RIO GRANDE STREET IN.

OKAY.

THEN THERE IS A PARKING LOT TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY THAT SERVES THE ADJACENT APARTMENT BUILDINGS.

OKAY.

IS THE OWNER ATTEMPTING OR CONSIDERING A REDEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD BE INCLUSIVE OF SOME OF THESE OTHER PROPERTIES? WHAT I'M SEEING LOOKS LIKE IT'S SO SMALL.

I DON'T SEE, OKAY.

SEE ANY WAY THAT A VERY DENSE DEVELOPMENT WOULD TAKE PLACE IF THIS WAS AN ISOLATED LOT AND I ALSO DON'T SEE HOW YOU WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO IT.

UM, SO IT SEEMS LIKE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF STEPS THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN FOR THERE TO BE A SUCCESSFUL NON HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT.

HOWEVER, ONE OF THOSE COULD BE SOME CONTIGUOUS RELATIONSHIP WITH AN ADJACENT PROPERTY.

I DON'T KNOW.

I'M SORRY HEATHER TRAVELING AGAIN.

I DON'T KNOW OF ANY PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE EXISTING THAT TOMORROW TO BE, BUT TO US WITH A SPECIFIC PROPOSAL, THEY HAVE NOT COME TO THE CITY WITH OTHERS FOR PARCEL THIS.

SO AT THIS POINT FROM THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOUT THAT, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY MINUTES THEY COULD FIT PACE, BUT THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO US.

YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I THOUGHT THERE WAS JUST A PARKING LOT BEHIND THE HISTORIC BUILDING AND UM, I WANTED, I PULLED THIS BECAUSE YEAH, LIKE I SAID, THERE WASN'T AN INTRUSION INTO THE HISTORIC ARENA AS OR IN THE LAST ITERATION AND SEEING WHAT HAS HAPPENED ON SOME RESOURCES LIKE THE GOLD DOLLAR BUILDING THAT'S COMPLETELY, IT'S SURROUNDED ON TWO SIDES AND OVERHEAD.

OKAY.

UM, WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION, I'M RELUCTANT TO GIVE AWAY, UM, THE HISTORIC ZONING WITHOUT A DEFINITE PLAN AND WITH A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT OF SETBACK THAT INCLUDES THE AIRSPACE.

I'M HEATHER .

THE PROPERTY I HAVE IS, AGAIN, IT'S BEEN A PARKING LOT FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS.

THERE WERE STILL A SMALL GARAGE APARTMENT WITH TWO CAR PARKING SPACES UNDER ME, BUT THE REST OF IT HAS BEEN PARKING FOR A LONG TIME, A LONG TIME AGO.

UM, AROUND THE TURN OF LAST CENTURY, THERE WERE LIVING QUARTERS BACK THERE.

BUT OTHER THAN THE GARAGE APARTMENT WITH THE PARKING SPACES UNDERNEATH IT, IT'S

[00:50:01]

ALL PARKING LOT.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES.

COMMISSIONER MYERS.

I'M LIVE TO DENY THE REMOVAL OF THE ZONING ON THE PROPERTY.

YEAH, WE CAN ASK THEM TO COME BACK TO COME TO THE WITH SPECIFIC PLANS.

BUT I AM VERY HESITANT, UM, BECAUSE OF WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND WHAT'S HAPPENED ABOUT OTHER BUILDINGS.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S UM, YEAH, CONNECTED TO THE HEADSET DEVICE.

SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY IT STILL SHOWS YOUR HEADSET, YOU WERE GOING TO SECOND THE MOTION GO LIKE THIS.

ALRIGHT.

CAN I SHARE A LITTLE HIGH SECOND TO THE MOTION? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I CAN JUST MENTION THAT I HAD TO ADJUST THE VOLUME JUST A LITTLE BIT UP OR DOWN.

AND THAT ACTIVATED MY MICROPHONE AT SOME WEIRD THING BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED.

COMMISSIONING A LITTLE MY TRY THAT.

OH WELL I WOULD LIKE TO ADD ANOTHER THING THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.

UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER MYERS MENTIONED OTHER PROJECTS, BUT I, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS OF A PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE PROJECTS, BUT TO HAVE THESE PROPERTIES GETTING NIPPED AWAY WITHOUT A SPECIFIC PLAN AND WITHOUT A WAY OF GUARANTEEING THE, UH, CONTINUITY OF THE PRESERVATION OF THE LANDMARK.

UH, I THINK THAT'S IRRESPONSIBLE OF US.

WE'RE NOT DOING OUR JOB IF WE ARE ADDING TO OR EXPOSING, UM, THE PROPERTIES UNDER OUR CARE TO UNANTICIPATED AND POSSIBLY VERY SIGNIFICANT RISK.

I THINK IN THIS CASE IN PARTICULAR THAT THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH A PROCESS WHERE THEY HAD WORKED IN APPROVED EDITION THAT MET AT LEAST THE FIRST ROUND OF OUR, OF OUR APPROVAL.

AND I COULD COME BACK AND ASK FOR ADJUSTMENTS, BUT, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH, UH, THAT, THAT DOESN'T WHAT THIS OWNER OR THIS APPLICANT IN A VERY GOOD LIGHT AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

SO WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT WE KNOW WORKED BUT IT WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH.

AND SO NOW THEY DON'T WANT TO SHOW US THE PROJECT.

I CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S GOING TO BE BETTER.

YES.

COMMISSIONER MYERS, I DON'T KNOW IF THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WORKED TO MY LIKING PARTICULARLY, BUT I, I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE.

I THINK THERE ARE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT CAN TRANSPIRE.

WE DON'T DESIGNATE LANDMARKS LIGHTLY THE UM, IN VIRTUALLY ALL BUT TWO OR THREE CHEESES WE DO, THE APPLICANT IS THE, THE OWNER.

APPLICANT KNOWS WHAT IS EXPECTED OF THEM AND, AND SIGN ON TO THAT AGREEMENT.

AND I HATE TO SEE WHEN THEY FIRST CAME TO US AND WANTED TO MOVE THE BRICK BUILDING TO THE FRONT OF THE LOT, YOU KNOW, THEY WANTED TO BUILD SOMETHING VERY LARGE, VERY, UM, YOU KNOW, A LARGE SCALE.

I HAD MAJOR CONCERNS ABOUT THAT AND I SEE APPLICANTS COMING AND NIBBLING AWAY, UM, AT THE H H PROPERTIES OR WHATEVER IT IS THEY THINK THEY WANT AT THE MOMENT.

AND I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I'D PROBABLY VOTE ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE.

MOTION PASSES.

SEVEN ZERO.

BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT DISCUSSION ITEM AND WHAT LEAD TO THE COMMISSIONING NEAR THAT.

UM, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WAS NOT AVAILABLE TONIGHT TO GIVE US THEIR BRIEFING ON A LOCAL CEMETERY, BUT THAT MEMO, A PRETTY DETAILED MEMO WAS PROVIDED IN THE BACKUP.

UM, SO IF, UH, WE STILL, THEY'RE STILL WILLING TO COME TO PRESENT TO US MAYBE JUNE OR JULY.

SO

[00:55:01]

IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE REQUESTING, OKAY.

UM, A LATER BRIEFING OR IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU GOT THE ANSWERS YOU NEEDED FROM THE MEMO, UM, YOU CAN LEAVE IT AT THAT NEED DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.

OKAY.

LET ME JUST JUMP IN.

I KNOW THE PROPERTY VERY WELL AND SOME OF THE NEW AND OTHER EXCITING THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING THERE, UH, THE BACKUP IS GOING TO TELL ONLY PART OF THE STORY, BUT A FORUM SUCH AS THIS EVEN FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME I THINK EXTENDS THE REACH OF THAT STORY.

UH, AND UNLESS IT'S A BURDEN ON THE CREW, I, I WOULD CERTAINLY THINK THAT, UH, THE LOADING SOME OF OUR AGENDA, UH, WE'D ALL LEARN A LOT FOR SURE MORE THAN, UH, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS.

BUT I REALLY DO HOPE THE PUBLIC WOULD THEN BECOME AS IMPRESSED AS I AM, JUST KNOWING WHAT'S OUT THERE.

ALRIGHT.

I'LL TAKE THAT AS A MOTION TO ADD IT TO OUR AGENDA FOR JUNE IF THAT WORKS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SECOND.

BYE.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE.

AS OPPOSED OKAY.

BUT THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THE REPORT WASN'T APPRECIATED.

IT WAS APPRECIATED.

OKAY.

SO WE WILL NOW MOVE

[Item 3 B1 (Part 2 of 2)]

ON TO, I DIDN'T SEE 106 EAST SIXTH STREET ALSO COMMISSIONING, I'M SORRY TO UM, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

SORRY.

UH, MR SHOULD ASK YOU, I THINK MS BERTRAND WAS TRYING TO TELL US SOMETHING.

OH, OKAY.

YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS, SORRY.

THE STAFF PERSON WHO WILL GIVE THE PRESENTATION ABOUT OAKWOOD CEMETERY IS CAN MCKNIGHT AND SHE'S NOT AVAILABLE ON JUNE 22ND SO SHE SAID SHE'D BE HAPPY TO COME IN JULY OR AUGUST, BUT SHE'LL CHECK HER SCHEDULE AND I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW IN REAL TIME THAT IT WILL BE ADDED TO THE FIRST AVAILABLE AGENDA WHEN, WHEN PARTS STAFF IS AVAILABLE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THAT WORKS.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, MR GO AHEAD.

OKAY.

BUT WHISTLE IS A CASE THAT CAN BE PULLED YOU OUT LAST MONTH AS WELL.

IT'S TO INSTALL AN AWNING OVER A SECONDARY ENTRANCE AND A RESTAURANT.

NEWS ON THE SIXTH STREET SIDE OF THE BUILDING, UH, STAFF HAD RESEARCHED THE UH, THE BUILDING AND IN THE TEENS TWENTIES THIRTIES THAT THERE WAS NO AWNING OVER THE SECTION.

NOW THE APPLICANT HAS UH, PROVIDED PHOTOGRAPHS FROM THE 1950S THAT SHOWING ON, UH, BUT IT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONES THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE BUILDING.

UM, STAFF DOESN'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH PUTTING AN AWNING AND PROVIDING SHADE AT THIS LOCATION BUT JUST BELIEVES THAT SINCE THIS WAS NOT KIND OF ORIGINAL FEATURE OF THE BUILDING, IT SHOULD BE DISTINGUISHED FROM, UH, BE ORIGINAL FEATURES AND THE REPRODUCTIONS OF THE ORIGINAL FEATURES ON THE BUILDING.

AND UH, I TALKED WITH THE APPLICANT THIS AFTERNOON AND THE AWNING ON SIXTH STREET NOW INTENDED TO BE A REPRODUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL DOSE DOES BARRY.

THAT STAFF FEELS THAT THIS AWNING THAT IS PROPOSED TONIGHT IS ONE THAT HAD A VERY SHORT LIFESPAN WHEN THERE WERE OTHER NO OTHER AWNINGS ON THE BUILDING.

AND IF IT IS GOING TO BE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION TONIGHT, IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE OTHER AWNINGS ON THE BUILDING.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES.

MISSIONARY MYERS.

LET'S JUST SIT L'S GATE.

WHEN WAS THE BUILDING DESIGNATED? THE LANDMARK? WHEN WAS IT? HOLD ON.

1978 AT THAT TIME THE LINKING FIFTIES PERIOD WAS NOT OKAY.

THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE BUILDING.

YEAH.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

THE PERIOD OF YEARS BEFORE.

MY QUESTION IS THE AWNING THAT IT IS ADJACENT TO AND I REALLY WAS CONCERNED THAT WE WERE BEING PRESENTED THE NEW DESIGN WITHOUT THE CLEAR RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO.

BUT THAT'S BEEN CLARIFIED IN THE UPDATED DOCUMENTATION.

UH, THE APP, I ASSUME IT WAS THE APPLICANT WHO WAS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, EARLIER, UH, I DUNNO, UH, MR SUDAN IF YOU HEARD HIM, BUT HE SAID THAT THAT PAWNING THAT IT WAS ADJACENT TO WAS ONLY WHAT, SIX

[01:00:01]

DID HE SAY SIX YEARS OLD? EIGHT YEARS OLD.

IT'S A NEW AWNING.

YES, IT WAS A NEW AWNING, BUT IT TAKES THE PLACE OF A, OF AN AWNING THAT WAS ON IN THE TEENS AND TWENTIES BUT IT WAS, IT WAS BETTER DOCUMENTATION OF BUT, BUT IT WAS A REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY OUR PREDECESSORS ON THIS COMMISSION.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR.

AND IT WAS APPROVED NOT AS A RECREATION OF A HISTORIC ELEMENT, SO IT HAS SOME, SOME CLARITIES BUT IT WAS APPROVED BECAUSE IT IS ACTUALLY A MODERN AWNING AND IT IS DISTINCT FROM THE HISTORIC.

WAS THAT, WAS THAT PART OF THE CONVERSATION AS IT WAS APPROVED? HONESTLY, COMMISSIONER, I DON'T REMEMBER.

I DO BELIEVE THAT, UH, BUT THE DESIRE WAS TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT CLOSELY APPROXIMATED PERHAPS A MODERN TAKE ON ME ON IT.

SO THAT DICTATED ITS DIMENSIONS, MATERIALS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT AS FAR AS IT BEING AN ACTUAL REPRODUCTION, I CANNOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW.

OH, THERE'S CERTAINLY SOME NEW MODERN ELEMENTS.

I GUESS THE POINT I GUESS I WOULD WANT TO MAKE, AND IT MAY NOT CHANGE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, BUT IF WE WERE TO SEE BOTH COMPOSITIONS TOGETHER, IF THAT HAD BEEN PRESENTED TO US AS ONE ADDITIONAL AWNING SYSTEM, UH, SOME SIX YEARS AGO AND IT WAS PRESENTED AS SOMETHING THAT REFLECTED THE PRECEDENT OF HISTORY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME WAS NOT A REPRODUCTION OF HISTORY.

UH, THERE WERE AWNINGS THAT WERE ON THE LOWER SECTION.

THERE WERE ROUNDINGS THAT DESIGNATED, UH, THE ENTRY.

UH, I SEE A FAIRLY SENSITIVE DESIGN THAT WORKS, SO IT'S NOT HISTORIC.

AND IF WE ARGUE THAT IT IS AN APPROPRIATE ADDITION TO A, UH, NON HISTORIC ADDITION TO A HISTORIC BUILDING, THERE'S, UH, CERTAINLY AMPLE PRECEDENT FOR DOING IT THAT WAY.

UM, I THINK THE FACT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT TO RELATE OR NOT RELATE TO AN AWNING THAT'S ONLY SIX YEARS OLD SEEMS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.

I, I, I GUESS I'M SOLD BY THE WAY THE TWO LOOK TOGETHER.

UH, AND I, I, I'M INCLINED TO, TO SAY THAT IT'S WORTH ALLOWING THEM, UH, TO GO FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSAL.

OH, I JUST MADE A MOTION TO REMIND US THAT WE NEED A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR DISCUSSION.

BUT THAT SOUNDED KIND OF LIKE A MOTION.

IT TURNED INTO A MOTION.

THE MOTION WAS TO, UM, APPROVE THE APPLICATION, RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND A SECOND BITE.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YES, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ATTACHED.

OKAY.

AND THAT WE GET DOES SPECIFICATIONS AND MATERIALS, UM, IN THE, IN THE FILE AND I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION ACTUALLY.

WELL, LET ME ASK FOR THAT QUALIFICATION OF, I BELIEVE.

DID THIS COME BEFORE THE, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS COMMITTEE.

AND WAS THAT WHERE THE REQUEST FOR THE ANCHORS TO BE WITHIN THE, THE SYSTEMS? NOT IN THE, IN THE STONE.

WHERE DID THAT COME FROM? WELL, IT DID NOT COME BEFORE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REVIEW COMMITTEE, BUT OUR GENERAL PRACTICE WAS TO RECOMMEND ANCHORING ANY SIGN OR CANOPY TO WITH BOLTS IN THE MORTAR RATHER THAN THE MASONRY.

AND IF A, THAT WOULD BE AGREEABLE TO THE SECONDARY.

I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE THAT IN MY MOTION.

YEAH.

MR. HENDERSON.

OKAY.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE.

I SAYS SEVEN ZERO.

OUR

[Item 3 B3 (Part 2 of 2)]

NEXT ITEM IS THE REGION 18 EDGE FOR PARIS.

I KNOW.

MISERY.

SEBASKI I'M SORRY.

HELLO? YES.

A

[01:05:01]

10, 18 ED HARRIS.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THAT IS CAROLYN CONTRAREZ, WHO'S THE CASE MANAGER ON THAT.

THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO, UH,