>> I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING.
[Landmark Commission on August 15, 2022.]
[00:00:08]
TODAY IS MONDAY, AUGUST 15TH, AND THE TIME IS FOUR O'CLOCK.I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER BY ROLL-CALL. COMMISSIONER ALBERT STOTT.
>> VICE CHAIRPERSON LANG IS ABSENT, BUT WE UNDERSTAND SHE'S ON HER WAY, COMMISSIONER MCLAIN, ABSENT, COMMISSIONERS THOMPSON.
>> DID I? THINK YOU'RE NOT ON THE FLOOR.
THINK YOU FORGOTTEN. CHAIRPERSON PATTERSON.
[LAUGHTER] WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? NOW YOU'RE HERE. I JUST GET [LAUGHTER] MY APOLOGIES.
>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTERESTS? WE HAVE ONE CONSENT ON ONE REGULAR AGENDA ITEM.
ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS? SIGN THEN WE'LL MOVE ON.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, HAS EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES, ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS OR AMENDMENTS TO THE MINUTES? NO. OKAY. MINUTES ARE ADOPTED AS PRESENTED AND APPROVED.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT HAS BEEN RECEIVED.
>> WE'RE GOING TO MOVE RIGHT ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE HAVE SOME NEW COMMISSIONERS WITH US, SO THIS IS AN EN BLOC VOTING.
I WILL ADD, THERE'S NO PRESENTATION FROM STAFF.
WE WILL SIMPLY ASK IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION OF STAFF.
IF YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AND THEN WE'LL VOTE IN BLOCK FOR APPROVAL, AND THAT IS IT.
THEN WE GO ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA, IT'S 22 LC-2A IS 2323 AVENUE L. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, CLARIFICATIONS FOR STAFF ABOUT THIS CASE? THIS IS A CONSENT BECAUSE IT FALLS SQUARELY WITHIN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THERE IS NOTHING THAT STAFF SEES QUESTIONABLE ABOUT THIS APPLICATION.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MOVE SOMETHING OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE YOU WANT TO EXPLORE IT MORE.
>> I'LL JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT 14, 12TH MARKET CASE NUMBER 22LC030 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.
>> DOES ANYBODY WANT THE ITEM PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA TO DISCUS ORDER? NO. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
>> I'M GOING TO MAKE WITH ANYWAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH SOMEONE.
DON'T [LAUGHTER] PUT YOU IN TIME-OUT.
WOULD ANY BRING IT TO THIS COMMISSION TO MAKE A MOTION? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEARINGS.
THIS IS FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
>> LET ME JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT BOTH OF THE ALTERNATE THROUGH VOTING TODAY, SO TONER AND MILTON ARE BOTH VOTING MEMBERS.
22LC027, THIS IS 1221, 1223, POST-OFFICE REQUESTS FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE, INCLUDING MODIFICATIONS TO THE FRONT DOORS.
SIX NOTICES WERE SENTENCE HERE RETURNED.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN ORDER TO MODIFY THE CURRENT FRONT DOOR CONFIGURATION.
THE HOUSE HAS TWO FRONT DOORS THAT ARE SEPARATED BY WHITE PIECE OF TRIM AND FUNCTION INDEPENDENTLY.
ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, THE HOUSE WAS USED AS A DUPLEX AND THOSE DOORS WERE USED TO ACCESS THE INDIVIDUALLY SEPARATED DWELLING UNITS.
THE HOUSE HAS SINCE BEEN CONVERTED BACK TO SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS.
THEY DESIRE TO HAVE FRONT DOORS THAT FUNCTION TOGETHER.
WE SEE ATTACHMENT A FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL.
PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR STORED PROPERTIES IN THE STAFF REPORT ALONG WITH CONFORMANCE.
NOW FINDS THE REQUEST GENERALLY CONFORMS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND MODIFICATIONS WILL HELP RETURN THE HOUSE TO ITS ORIGINAL APPEARANCE AND FUNCTION AS A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTS.
HAVE HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED DESIGN.
OVAL WINDOW INSERTS WITH DECORATIVE GLASS OR A MORE MODERN DESIGN AND NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE HOUSE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE DESIGN BE ALTERED TO REMOVE THE OVAL DECORATIVE GLASS ELEMENT,
[00:05:05]
HALF GLASS DOOR WITH A RECTANGULAR WINDOW INSERT.WITH CLEAR GLASS WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE.
THAT RECOMMENDATION STAFFER COMMENCED THE REQUEST TO BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
SPECIFIC CONDITION 1, THE APPLICANT MUST ADHERE TO THE DESIGN PLACEMENT AND MATERIALS SUBMITTED.
AN ATTACHMENT A WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATION.
A, THE DESIGN OF THE FRONT DOOR SHOULD BE MODIFIED TO REMOVE THE OVAL DECORATIVE GLASS ELEMENT.
THE FINAL DESIGN OF THE FRONT DOOR, SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER.
MATERIAL IS BEING REMOVED, SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR REUSE.
ITEMS 3 THROUGH SEVEN ARE STANDARD AND WE HAVE SOME PICTURES.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND YOU CAN SEE THE DOOR CONFIGURATION HERE.
THIS IS A DRAWING SHOWING THE PROPOSED NEW CONFIGURATION.
DRAWING SHOWING PROPOSED DESIGNED FOR DOORS, PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, EAST, AND WEST.
THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NONE. AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF OUR PROPERTY OWNER AVAILABLE.
WANT TO STEP UP AND SIGN IN AND TELL US YOUR NAME.
>> EUBANKS, THIRD COAST CONSTRUCTION.
>> NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT STEPHANIE LANG HAS JOINED THE MEETING AT 4:07.
[NOISE] WON'T YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR PROJECT HERE.
>> YES, THIS HOME WAS PURCHASED BY A FAMILY FROM THE UK.
THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE DOWN HERE AND THEY WANTED TO JUST CONVERT THIS DUPLEX TO A SINGLE UNIT HOME.
WE DID FIND EVIDENCE INSIDE THAT THE ORIGINAL WOOD FLOORS HAD A WALL BUILT OVER THE TOP TO SEPARATE THE UPSTAIRS AND DOWNSTAIRS. WE JUST WANT TO PUT IT BACK AND I. [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT WAS PRETTY CLEAR FROM THE PICTURES. [LAUGHTER]
>> I UNDERSTAND WE JUST NEED TO MODIFY THE DESIGN AND THE DOOR ACTUALLY HAD ANOTHER OPTION FOR THE DOOR.
BUT I THINK YOU WANT A SOLID GLASS PANEL, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S RIGHT. WITH NO DECORATIVE WINDOW.
>> THAT'D BE A LITTLE TOO MODERN.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.
>> THAT WAS MY BACKUP. THEN YOU'D GO WITH THAT OR A SOLID PANEL.
I CAN SUBMIT THAT TO YOU WHEN WE FIND THAT DOOR.
>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS PROJECT?
>> IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE? NO? I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND ASK IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
>> NOW, YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ THE CONDITIONS.
YOU CAN JUST SAY AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
>> I MEAN THAT WE APPROVE CASE 22LC-027 WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
>> ANY DISCUSSION? I WILL NOTE THAT IN READING THE APPLICATION, I FELT THE EXACT SAME THING THAT STAFF FELT.
THE OVAL GLASS WAS NOT APPROPRIATE HISTORIC HOME.
I WAS REAL HAPPY AND I WHOLE HEARTEDLY AGREED.
GO AHEAD AND MOVE. RAISE YOUR HAND.
>> DISCUSSION ITEMS OF RECEIVERSHIP IS APPROVED IN TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 214, SECTION 24-00111, TITLED ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY TO PRESERVE STANDARD BUILDINGS AS PROPERTY.
[NOISE] IN LIGHT OF SEVEN-TWELFTHS.
I WANT TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT RECEIVERSHIP AND SPECIFICALLY BE NICE IF EVER EXERCISED IN ANY CASE.
LIKE THAT DUPLEX STRUCTURE LIKE THIS, WHERE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT WERE WHERE THAT CODE WOULD APPLY TO IT.
[00:10:37]
[INAUDIBLE] KNOWING THE TYPE OF [INAUDIBLE] CITY THAT GALVESTON IS AND OVER THE YEARS LOOKING INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING A RESOLUTION PROGRAM HERE, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT AT BEST AND [INAUDIBLE] IN A MINUTE SINCE I [INAUDIBLE] HERE, AND AS IN MARYLAND, YOU WOULD NEED A COOPERATION OR AN ENTITY OR AN AGENCY OR SOMEONE WITH FUNDS [INAUDIBLE] AND THE ABILITY TO EITHER MAINTAIN OR RESTORE A PROPERTY.PART OF RECEIVERSHIP PROGRAM ESPECIALLY ONE THAT'S OCCUPIED, IS TO MAINTAIN THE BUILDING SO THAT THOSE OCCUPANTS ARE LIVING IN A PROPERTY THAT IS MEETING THOSE CODES SO THAT THE HEALTH SAFETY ISSUES OF THOSE OCCUPANTS ARE BEING MAINTAINED UNTIL SOME OTHER PERSON COME IN AND BUY THE PROPERTY, TAKE OVER THE PROPERTY SOMEWHERE FOR.
USUALLY, IF YOU HAVE RECEIVERSHIP PROGRAM, IT MEANS THAT THE OWNER OR THIS OFFERING PERSON IS NOT ABLE TO MAINTAIN WHAT IS GOING TO PAY THAT PROPERTY.
IT CAN BE OCCUPIED OR IT CAB BE UNOCCUPIED.
THAT'S THE SIMPLEST WAY TO SAY WHY WOULD WE USE A RECEIVER? TYPICALLY NOT TALKING ABOUT SMALL PROPERTIES.
USUALLY, TALKING ABOUT MULTI-FAMILY COMPLEXES, APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
SOMETHING WHERE IT WOULD TAKE QUITE A BIT OF FUNDS TO MAINTAIN IT OR, AND STORE IT TO WHATEVER LEVEL IT NEEDS TO BE SO THAT IT COULD LITERALLY GO ON THE MARKET TO BE SOLD.
THIS THING ABOUT A RECEIVER IS THAT THE CITY [INAUDIBLE] THEY ARE NOT BUYING THE PROPERTY FROM THE OWNER.
THEY'RE LITERALLY SAYING, YOU HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THIS PROPERTY CITING FOR WHATEVER REASONS DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE FUNDS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THIS PROPERTY AS WELL SO THEY HAVE BID IT OUT TO AGAIN AGENT/CORPORATION OR SELF LIFE ENTITIES, THAT SAYS, I HAVE THE WHERE WITH ALL TO EITHER MAINTAIN IT OR RESTORE IT TO SOME CAPACITY SO THAT IT CAN BE TYPICALLY SOLD IN THE FUTURE.
WHAT DOES THE RECEIVER GET OUT OF IT? IN MARYLAND IT WAS ABOUT 10-50 PERCENT OF WHATEVER THE SALE PRICE IS.
THAT'S THE BENEFIT TO RECEIVE [INAUDIBLE] ALL OF THE FUNDS THAT THEY HAVE EXTENDED.
WE GET A LITTLE SOMETHING ON TOP OF IT.
IT'S NOT ACROSS THE CITY ASIDE FROM THE COURT PROCEEDING THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR THAT PROPERTY.
IN MARYLAND, WE DID EVERYTHING IN HOUSE.
IT WAS EASIER AND LESS EXPENSIVE THAT WAY.
WE HAD OUR OWN RECEIPT ATTORNEY.
WE'D FUNNEL PROJECT TO HIM OR HER, AND THEY WOULD HANDLE IT.
AGAIN, IF THERE WERE FOLKS, ENTITIES THAT WOULD SAY, YES, I HAVE THE WHERE WITH ALL TO COME IN AND RESTORE OR MAINTAIN THIS PROJECT.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE OPTIONS FOR PROPERTY OR PROJECTS IN DALLAS.
I'M NOT SURE IF THERE IS THAT RESOURCE.
[00:15:08]
I WILL ALSO SAY THAT I HAVE NOT LOOKED SO WHETHER OR NOT AS TIME CHANGES ESPECIALLY THE PROPERTY VALUE THAT HAS CHANGED, WHETHER OR NOT THAT [INAUDIBLE] I'M JUST GOING TO LEAVE THAT BLANK STATEMENT AS IT IS.THAT'S WHAT I'M AWARE OF IN TERMS OF PROCEDURES THAT WE NEED TO HAVE SOMEWHAT AND TO GIVE WHOEVER THAT IS GOING TO SAY, I WILL TAKE OVER THIS PROPERTY AND MANAGE IT UNTIL THERE'S ANOTHER LEGAL PROCESS [INAUDIBLE].
ON THE CITY SIDE, IT'S A DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDING.
NOTICE ALL THOSE PEOPLE PROCEEDINGS [INAUDIBLE] AND DO WHAT THEY SAY THEY WILL.
>> I WOULD JUST THAT THE CITY HAS AN ENTITY, OF COURSE, DOESN'T HAVE THE STAFF OR CAPACITY TO MANAGE PROPERTIES.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE, SOME THIRD-PARTY PERSPECTIVE.
IT REALLY DEPENDS QUITE A BIT ON THE UNIT ITSELF.
IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A HOUSE THAT WAS AN ICON FOR THE CITY, I THINK THERE WOULD PROBABLY BE A LITTLE MORE EFFORT THAN THERE WOULD BE ON SOMETHING THAT WAS IN REAL BAD SHAPE AND IT BURNED DOWN AND WAS STRUCTURAL AND SOUND.
THERE'S DIFFERENT LEVELS, I GUESS WHERE WE'RE PROBABLY EVER INTO SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF AT ALL.
BUT FROM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT STANDPOINT, WE HAVE NOT DONE IT AT LEAST [INAUDIBLE] HOWEVER, MANY YEARS BECAUSE WE JUST DON'T HAVE CAPACITY AND STAFF TO MANAGE THEM.
[00:25:22]
>> I WISH THERE WERE SOME WAY WE COULD FORM
[00:25:25]
SOME PARTNERSHIP WHERE IF IT WAS A VACANT PROPERTY, SUCH AS THESE TWO LITTLE PROPERTIES, OR DIDN'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES, YOU ARE INSIDE A NATIONAL [INAUDIBLE].
IF THERE IS A POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD FENCE THE PROPERTY OFF, SIGN ON THE PROPERTY THAT SAYS THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN CONDEMNED AND WILL BE SOLD AT AN AUCTION OR SUBMIT TO LANDMARK COMMISSION WHICH YOU MUST ALSO SUBMIT THAT YOU HAVE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO MAN AND THE PROPERTY WILL THEN GO THROUGH LANDMARK [INAUDIBLE] THEN IT WILL SOLD TO SOMEBODY, SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? AS LONG AS IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING AND A VACANT PROPERTY, IS THAT AN OPTION? JUST THEY'RE NOT TORN DOWN.
IN THOSE BUILDINGS, I THINK GHF WOULD HAVE BOUGHT THEM AND MOVED THEM AND FILLED THEM.
>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. ACTUALLY, WE ENCOURAGE THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN GET A GROUP LIKE GHF TO BUY THE PROPERTY OUTRIGHT.
[OVERLAPPING] IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES.
>> [INAUDIBLE] IN THESE STRUCTURES?
>> THE PROPERTY OWNER WANTED TO MAINTAIN HIS PROPERTY.
>> IF THEY WANT TO BUY THE PROPERTY AND GET IT INTO A GOOD SHAPE, WE'RE ALL ABOUT THAT.
HERE'S WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES, IS A LOT OF TIMES WE DON'T GET GROUPS LIKE GHF INVESTING.
WE GET ANOTHER PARTY WHO COMES IN AND HAS A LOT OF ELABORATE PLANS, DRAGS IT OUT FOR 2, 3 MORE YEARS, AND THEN IT GETS EVEN WORSE THAN THE INTERIM.
THEN BY THE TIME WE WERE GETTING AROUND TO ENFORCING AGAIN, THEY SELL IT AND THAT PROCESS GOES ON AND ON.
HERE THE WHOLE TIME IT'S UNSAFE TO THE PUBLIC.
>> IS THERE, IN THAT PROCESS, THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE CITY COULD PUT A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY, [INAUDIBLE] THE SAID VACANT PROPERTY, WITH A NOTICE THAT THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN CONDEMNED AND WILL GO UP FOR AUCTION TO BE REMOVED.
IF YOU DON'T GET ANY BUYERS, WE TEAR IT DOWN.
BUT AT LEAST WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE GHF WANTED THOSE PROPERTIES, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ISSUE WAS.
>> LANDMARK DIDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT.
I GOT A CALL FROM SOMEONE GOING THEY ARE TEARING DOWN THESE HOUSES.
THE UNDERSTANDING WAS, I DO NOT HAVE VERIFICATION OF THIS, [INAUDIBLE] WAS THAT THOSE TWO PROPERTIES WERE ORIGINAL TO THAT PLOT.
THEY WERE AMONGST THE FIRST FREED SLAVE HOUSES.
THAT IS SIGNIFICANT TO OUR HISTORY.
EVERY BIT IS TO ME, SIGNIFICANT TO US.
[INAUDIBLE] IT'S PART OF OUR HISTORY.
IT WAS JUST A TRAGEDY THAT IT HAPPENED.
I THINK THAT'S PART OF ALSO SOME OF THE CONCERN AS WE'VE HEARD.
I'M NOT A LAWYER, I ONLY PLAY ONE ON TV.
[LAUGHTER] IT DIDN'T GET VERY GOOD RATINGS, SO IT GOT CANCELED.
ANYWAYS, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE'S A NUMBER OF TOOLS IN AT LEAST THE CIVIL COURT, LIENS OF DIFFERENT TYPES.
WHERE WE CAN SAY, SAID PROPERTY ONLY THEY'RE DERELICT, YOU'RE POSING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND A THREAT.
WE'RE GOING TO PUT A LIEN ON THIS PROPERTY AND TRY TO REMEDY IT BY DOING A PUBLIC AUCTION, CONDEMN THE PROPERTY, FENCE IT OFF SO PEOPLE DON'T COME IN, THIS PROPERTY'S BEEN CONDEMNED, AND YOU HAVE 60 DAYS FOR PUBLIC AUCTION.
SUBMIT YOUR APPLICATIONS TO THE CITY AND WHAT YOU'D WISH TO PURCHASE IT, AND THE PROCESS IS YOU HAVE XYZ DAYS TO THEN COME UP, PICK UP THE PROPERTY AND MOVE IT ON BEFORE THE CITY HAS TO PAY TO TEAR IT DOWN.
>> WE TALK ABOUT [INAUDIBLE] PROBABLY THE FIRST THING IS IT'S EASY FOR A CONTRACTOR TO GO IN, AND MOW IT TO THE GROUND.
[INAUDIBLE], PUT A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY.
EASY-PEASY. HOWEVER, WHEN YOU TALKING ABOUT LENDING A PROPERTY AND THEN PLACING A LIEN ON THAT PROPERTY, THE FIRST THING IS [INAUDIBLE] WHAT ARE YOU PLACING THE LIEN ON THE PROPERTY FOR? THAT LIEN IS BASED ON A MONETARY AMOUNT.
NOW WE HAVE TO DO AN INVESTIGATION INTO WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. GET THE [INAUDIBLE], GO IN, GET THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO GO IN AND MAKE THE ASSESSMENT.
AS LIEN IS A MONETARY AMOUNT OF WORK DONE.
[00:30:08]
LET'S JUST SAY MAYBE WE DO HAVE SOME OF THAT INFORMATION AND THE THING ABOUT A LIEN IS THAT A PERSON CAN [INAUDIBLE] WHERE THEY CAN PAY OFF $10,000 WORTH OF WORK.YOU'D BE SURPRISED. I'M JUST GOING TO PAY THIS AND KNOCK OFF THE $10,000 OF PROPERTIES STILL IN THE SAME CONDITION [INAUDIBLE] AND THEN, OF COURSE, SAY I'M NOT GOING TO PAY OFF THE LIEN BUT THE CITY CAN'T TAKE MY PROPERTY [INAUDIBLE].
BUT I WILL SAY THIS, THE CITY HAS A LOW [INAUDIBLE] FORECLOSURE PROCESS WHICH IS REALLY WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO.
WHERE THE LIENS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID FOR, [INAUDIBLE], WHERE THE PROPERTIES [INAUDIBLE].
WE HAVE OUR OWN FORECLOSURE ATTORNEYS THAT THE CITY HAS HIRED OUT GO TO THAT PROCESS.
THE NUMBER OF FORECLOSURES IN THAT PROCESS [INAUDIBLE].
>> THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, THE BACK PROPERTY WAS THREE STRUCTURES ON THAT LOT.
TWO FRONT ONES WERE TORN DOWN THE BACK ONE STAYED.
THAT'S THE ONE HE HAD RENTED OUT TO RENTERS.
HE CONTINUES TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY WAS NOT IN FORECLOSURE, JUST WASN'T GOING TO PAY TO DO ANYTHING WITH THOSE STRUCTURES.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION IS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE GOT TO FIND SOME MEETING OF THE MINDS IN THE MIDDLE BECAUSE WE DID HAVE PEOPLE THAT ONE OR BOTH INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT WOULD HAVE PICKED UP AND MOVED.
I KNOW THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE INTERESTED IN THOSE PROPERTIES HAD A LOT AND HAD THE RESOURCES TO KEEP THOSE BUILDINGS UP EASILY AND MOVE THEM WITHIN, DO WE SAY, THEY HAVE TO STAY WITHIN THE EAST END.
RIGHT? I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANY SOLUTION.
MAYBE THERE'S NOT, BUT I LIKE IT IF THERE WAS SOMETHING.
>> SEVERAL YEARS AGO, I RECALL THE CITY HAD A PROGRAM.
[INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS A PRETTY SIMPLE PROGRAM.
THE CITY HAS THIS HOUSE [INAUDIBLE] PROGRAM.
ANY TYPE OF PROPERTY, [INAUDIBLE].
I WILL TELL YOU, I CAN COUNT MORE THAN TWO LIENS [INAUDIBLE] OR I HAD OWNED ONE ITSELF, KNOCKING IT DOWN BEFORE THE CITY [INAUDIBLE] OR WHATEVER.
>> [INAUDIBLE] I THINK I CAN SAY THAT'S IT'S MORE THIS THAN THIS IS IN THE CITY AND AGAIN, DIFFERENT TYPES OF WAYS.
THE PROPERTY, SOMEONE'S GOING TO [INAUDIBLE].
>> THE BOTTOM LINE IS, THE CITY'S NOT GOING TO GO IN AND BUY [INAUDIBLE].
THE CITY ISN'T GOING TO DO THAT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] ENGLISH FOR THAT ONE.
>> I DON'T THINK ANY OF US WERE SUGGESTING THAT.
>> TO SOME DEGREE, THE MARKET WAS.
AT THE CURRENT TIME, MARKETS TAKE CARE OF SOME THIS TO AN EXTENT.
IF YOU HAVE IT THERE LIKE PROPERTY, IT CAN LITERALLY BE RESTORED.
IF YOU HAD SOMEBODY WITH AN UNLIMITED SUPPLY OF MONEY, ANYTHING CAN BE RESTORED TO BE QUITE HONEST, BUT THE LIKELIHOOD, IT'S A GAME OF ODDS.
ARE WE GETTING FOLKS THAT ARE LIKELY TO REALLY COME IN AND DO THAT OR NOT AND AT THE COST OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
THAT'S IT. UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE TO VEER ON THE SIDE [OVERLAPPING].
>> CITY HAS A LIABILITY. [BACKGROUND]
>> MAY I ASK, THIS MOSTLY IN THE CASE WHERE SOMEONE WANTS TO GROW THE PROPERTY,
[00:35:05]
WHO'S WILLING TO SELL.WE CAN CERTAINLY COME UP NAMED CASES WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT THE LEAST BIT INTERESTED IN LETTING GO OF THE PROPERTY AND WHILE IT SITS THERE DETERIORATES.
PROCESS OF TAKING PROPERTY AWAY FROM SOMEONE IN TEXAS IS LONG AND ONEROUS AS I UNDERSTAND.
>> I'LL ALSO SAY THIS, WITH THE [INAUDIBLE] YEARS AGO, THE RECEIVER WOULD GET WHATEVER THE PERCENTAGE IS AND THE PROPERTY WOULD BE SOLD.
BUT, THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY WOULD GET [INAUDIBLE].
IT'S NOT EVEN SELLING THE PROPERTY SO THAT THE OWNER DOESN'T GET ANY OF THE EXCESS MONEY THAT COMES FROM THE MORTGAGE OR WHATEVER.
THAT'S THE BENEFIT OF PROPERTIES GOING [INAUDIBLE] AND IN MANY CASES, BENEFIT FOR THE OWNER [INAUDIBLE] AND THAT'S WHY [NOISE] OFTENTIMES, VOLUNTARILY WILL SAY YES [INAUDIBLE]. [NOISE] I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE SAME TO YOU, BUT THAT WAS AN INTERESTING TYPE OF SCENARIO WHERE [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] I THINK IT'S SIMILAR, BUT AFTER SPEAKING WITH THEM [INAUDIBLE] BUT EITHER WAY, I THINK THE BIGGEST TASK HERE IS THAT WE ALL WORK TOGETHER TO NOT BE ONE SIDED AND NOT SEE THE DEMOLITION TO SHOW UP [INAUDIBLE] [NOISE]
>>IF IT'S IN THE DISTRICT, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH LANDMARK, RIGHT?
>> RIGHT. UNLESS IT'S BEEN DETERMINED TO BE DANGEROUS.
>> [INAUDIBLE] NEVER CAME BEFORE US.
>> JUST BEFORE THE HPO, AND THEN I MAKE A DETERMINATION ON IF THE PROPERTY IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE DISTRICT.
IF IT'S CONTRIBUTING TO THE DISTRICT, THEN I DENY THE DEMOLITION AND THEN THEY CAN APPEAL THAT TO LANDMARK COMMISSION.
[00:40:02]
[INAUDIBLE] WITH SOMEONE ELSE. [INAUDIBLE]ON A SMALL HOUSE DOES THE CITY PAY TO HAVE THE HOUSES DEMOLISHED, AND HAVE A CONTRACTOR COME INTO, I GUESS, BID AND DEMOLISH IT? I'M NOT A LAWYER, I'M AN ARCHITECT.
[NOISE] IN MY OPINION, AND IN MY THOUGHT A SMALL HOUSE COULD BE ROLLED OFF THE PROPERTY INSTEAD OF DEMOLISHED, AND IT ACHIEVES THE SAME GOAL.
THE HOUSE'S PRESERVED AND RELOCATE.
IN MY THOUGHT IT WOULD ACHIEVE THE SAME OBJECTIVE, MAINTAIN THE HOUSE, WOULDN'T HAVE THE COST OF DEMOLITION RELOCATED.
>> BUT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE RECEIVERSHIP FIRST [OVERLAPPING]
>> RECEIVERSHIP AND DEMOLISHING, ISN'T THAT THE SAME?
>> NO. RECEIVERSHIP IS MAINTAINING [INAUDIBLE]
>> THE WOOD THAT'S TAKEN OFF THE HOUSING, EITHER THE FORM THAT'S DEMOLISHED OR AS A WHOLE HOUSE?
>> DOESN'T IT HAVE TO GO INTO RECEIVERSHIP IF IT'S DEMOLISHED?
>> NO, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST.
>> I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND IT ON THE BIG, I'M TALKING ABOUT LITTLE SMALL HOUSES THAT YOU CAN MOVE ON A TRUCK.
AS A CONTRACTOR, I'M GOING TO DEMOLISH IT.
I'M DEMOLISHING IT, BUT WHAT I'M DOING IS I'M REMOVING THAT MATERIAL FROM THE LOT.
HAPPENS TO BE NOT REMOVED IN INDIVIDUAL TRUCKS BUT IT'S ONE UNIT, I ROLL IT OFF AND I PUT IT ON ANOTHER LOT TO MAINTAIN THE HISTORIC VALUE OF IT, AND ESSENTIALLY THE HOUSE WAS DEMOLISHED?
>> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE [INAUDIBLE]
>> WHO'S GOING TO RESTORE THAT [NOISE]
>> YOU'D HAVE SOMEONE BID ON THAT.
YOU'D PUT IT UP FOR BID BEFORE IT'S DEMOLISHED.
INSTEAD OF THE CITY PAYING FOR IT TO BE DEMOLISHED, IT WOULD BE ONCE GIVEN TO THE OWNER OR SOMEBODY TO PAY FOR THAT HOUSE.
>> IF THE HOUSE WERE TAKEN OFF IN PIECES, DEMOLISHED AND REASSEMBLED, YOU WOULD GET AROUND THE LEGAL PART.
IF I TOOK THE TWO PIECES OF THE ROOF OFF, THE FOUR WALLS AND THE FLOOR, REASSEMBLED IT, I WOULD ACHIEVE THE SAME OBJECTIVE.
FROM AN ARCHITECT PERSPECTIVE, BUREAUCRACY OF THE LAW IS GETTING IN THE WAY OF COMMON SENSE.
>> NO, ASSEMBLING THE WHOLE HOUSE, BUT GETTING IN THE WAY OF THE BUREAUCRACY OF A SMALL HOUSE THAT WE CAN MOVE EASILY.
>> [INAUDIBLE] SOMEBODY WANTS TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.
>> IN THIS CASE, WE HAD PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY.
>> THAT IS A VIABLE [OVERLAPPING]
>> TELL ME WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
>> BUT YOUR POINT IS, DOES THE CITY NEED A RADICAL PROGRAM? WE RELY ON EITHER THE PRIVATE SECTOR WHICH IS REALLY STRONG RIGHT NOW, REHABBING OR SOME FOUNDATION [INAUDIBLE] BOTH OF THOSE.
[00:45:02]
WE ARE FINE IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO TAKE A HOUSE, MOVE TO ANOTHER SITE AND REHAB IT.>> YEAH. AS LONG AS THE PERSON INTERESTED IN THE PROPERTIES WOULD PAY ALL COSTS, [OVERLAPPING] PICK IT UP, MOVE IT ON.
>> THE CITY IS GOING TO PAY X NUMBER OF DOLLARS.
SO INSTEAD OF YOU PAYING THOSE DOLLARS THEN PARTY COMES IN, AND PAYS YOU THE SAME FUNDS AND THEN [INAUDIBLE]
>> THEY WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO PAY US.
>> WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IT'S BEST TO KEEP IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR THE ENTITIES THAT ARE KNOWN.
THAT IS THEIR REWARD WITH THAT.
>> BUT HOW DO WE KNOW, THAT SAID HOUSE IS GETTING READY TO BE DEMOLISHED IF NO ONE FROM THE CITY DOESN'T LET LANDMARK OR SOMEBODY KNOW THAT? THAT WAS WHAT I WAS ASKING EARLIER.
>> YEAH, BUT [OVERLAPPING] THEY DIDN'T NOTIFY LANDMARK OR THF TO SAY THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TEAR THIS DOWN, ARE YOU INTERESTED? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
>> WE'RE INTERESTED, PUT THE MONEY UPFRONT. COME MOVE IT ALL.
[00:54:43]
>> OBVIOUSLY, WE APPRECIATE YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON WANTING TO SAY [INAUDIBLE] SO IF THERE'S SOME PROBLEMATIC THING THAT MIGHT BE
[00:55:17]
INTERPRETED TO [INAUDIBLE].>> LAURA BOURGEOIS, DIRECTOR OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS FOR GHF.
JUST GHF HAS BEEN MENTIONED DURING THIS DISCUSSION AND WE'VE WITH HOUSES, WE HAVE AN EASEMENT PROJECT PROGRAM WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR TO RECEIVERSHIP, THAT'S HOW OUR REVOLVING FUND GOT STARTED.
REVOLVING FUND IS A PROGRAM THAT DOES EXACTLY THIS AND HAVING DEALT WITH IT THROUGH MUNICIPAL COURT, ONE OF THE PROPERTIES THAT WAS DEALT BY THE CITY, HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING THAT HOUSE OFF OF YOUR DOCKET.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT GETTING PETITIONS FROM THE CITY LANDS.
THOSE HISTORIC PROPERTIES HOLD MUNICIPAL COURT AND RIGHT NOW ITS VERY DIFFICULT TO EVEN FIND OUT THE ADDRESS OF THAT BECAUSE WHEN YOU GO TO MUNICIPAL COURT, THEY ADDRESSES ARE PURPOSELY LIKED OUT, SO WE DON'T HAVE A WAY FOR US TO EVEN KEEP AN EYE ON THE DOCKET FOR THESE HISTORIC PROPERTIES.
OVER THE WEEKEND WE FOUND OUT AT LEAST TWO MORE HOUSES THAT ARE NOT IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS THAT ARE ON THE DOCKET, AND THIS IS THE FIRST WE'VE HEARD OF IT AND WE HEARD OF IT BECAUSE ONE OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS WALKED TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD [LAUGHTER] AND SAW THE NOTICE ON THE PROPERTY.
BY THE TIME IT GETS TO THAT POINT, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO EVEN ENGAGE IN A CONVERSATION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER.
IN THEIR MIND, THE CITY IS GOING TO PAY FOR THEM TO GET AN EMPTY LOT [INAUDIBLE].
YES, WE'VE MOVED HOUSES BEFORE.
EMPTY LOTS ARE GETTING LOWER AND LOWER IN TERMS OF INVENTORY.
SO SAYING, OH, GHF IS GOING TO COME AND MOVE THIS HOUSE IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN THAT WEEKEND OR IN A MONTH, BECAUSE WE NEED TO FIND THEM A PLACE TO MOVE THESE PROPERTIES TO.
IT'S NOT LET ME GO ON AND GRAB AN EMPTY LOT, FINE ONE AND THEN YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF BUYING IT.
ALL OF THAT TAKES A LOT MORE TIME THAN THE MUNICIPAL COURT GIVES YOU.
FOR EXAMPLE, WITH 1826 HOUSE, IT WAS ON A FIRE, FLIPPERS LOOKED AT IT, THEY BACKED OUT BECAUSE IT WAS TOO MUCH WORK.
GHF WENT THROUGH MONTHS AND MONTHS OF GOING THROUGH MUNICIPAL COURT FOR EXTENSIONS BECAUSE THE WILL WOULD NOT BE PROBATED FOR US TO BE ABLE TO EVEN BUY THE HOUSE OUTRIGHT FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THEN EVEN AFTERWARDS WE WENT THROUGH MONTHS OF GOING FROM MUNICIPAL COURT TO GIVE UPDATES ON THE STATUS OF THE PROJECT.
IT WAS BASICALLY MONTH AFTER MONTH, WE'RE TRYING TO PROBATE, WENT THROUGH TWO TITLE COMPANIES JUST TO GET THE WILL PROBATED.
IT'S NOT AN EASY JUST CALL GHF AND IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OR CALL A FLIPPER AND IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
BUT IT'S ALSO VERY DIFFICULT WHEN WE GET THE LATE NOTICE, LIKE IN THE CHURCH HOUSES.
IT WAS LIKE THE DAY OFF AND IT'S US SCRAMBLING TO GET THERE.
DO YOU WANT US TO BUY THIS PROPERTY AND THEY'RE LIKE, NO, THE CITY IS HERE WILLING TO PAY FOR DEMOLITION OF THESE TWO PROPERTIES [INAUDIBLE] MY PROPERTY.
THEY'RE NOT WANTING TO GO THE STEP FURTHER.
OUR CONCERN WITH THESE TYPES OF PIECES, ESPECIALLY IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS, IS THAT IT BYPASSES THE LANDMARK COMMISSIONER BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO COME BEFORE YOU WHEN THAT ORDER GETS ISSUED.
THERE'S NO CONVERSATION ON HOW TO FIX THE PROBLEM, EVEN ON AN PROPERTY OWNER STANDPOINT, NOT EVEN US GETTING THE PROPERTY, NOT EVEN THE FLIPPER GETTING THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S NO POINT OF US, YOU GOT THIS NOTICE FROM COURT AND IT'S SCARY AS A PROPERTY OWNER THAT ALL YOUR HOUSES CONDEMNED AND IT'S GOING TO GET DEMOLISHED.
THEN OH MY GOD, WHAT AM I GOING TO DO?
[01:00:02]
THEY DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO COME AND TALK TO US OR EVEN TALK TO YOU GUYS ABOUT WHAT THEY COULD DO TO REMEDY THAT COURT ORDER UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.RIGHT NOW IS HOW HE'S FEELING.
AS FAR AS SALVAGE, WE DO HAVE A SALVAGE WAREHOUSE.
WE'VE NEVER GOTTEN THAT CALL FROM A CONTRACTOR SAYING WE GOT A CONTRACT FROM THE CITY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO IN AND DEMO TWO HOUSES WITHIN HISTORIC DISTRICT.
WE NEVER GOT THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO AND SALVAGE ITS MATERIAL.
A LOT OF THE TIME AGAIN, IT'S WORD OF MOUTH.
SOMEONE CALLS AND SAY, YOUR DMD IS ABOUT TO DEMOLISH THIS HOUSE AND IT'S OUTSIDE OF A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WE'RE SCRAMBLING TO GET A TRUCK AND TRAILER AND STAFF OVER THERE JUST TO SALVAGE WHATEVER WE CAN.
BECAUSE THE CONTRACTOR THAT GETS HIRED TO DEMOLISH, THEY'RE JUST GOING TO GO IN WITH A BULLDOZER OR THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO AND TAKE APART THIS HOUSE.
>> EXACTLY. I THINK EVEN IF WE [INAUDIBLE] IS OUT OF THE QUESTION, GHF VERY MUCH LIKE TO BE IN TALK WITH THE CITY, HOW WE COULD BETTER COMMUNICATE.
THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF HAVING A PRESERVATION NONPROFIT IS FOR US TO ADVOCATE AND TO HELP AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, WHETHER IT'S INITIATE TALKS TO RECEIVE THE PROPERTY OR BUY THE PROPERTY, OR EVEN IF IT'S TO HELP THAT PROPERTY OWNER AMEND YOUR COURT ORDER.
WE'RE AN ADVOCACY, WE'RE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION AND WE JUST WANT [INAUDIBLE] THEM IN A DUMPSTER.
AT THE END OF THE DAY THE SAME WAY THAT THEY'VE HAVEN'T CUT THEIR GRASS FOR MONTHS WITH A PROPERTY ON IT, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE SAME THING WITH AN EMPTY LOT AND NOW WE HAVE AN EMPTY LOT IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT.
>> [INAUDIBLE] HOW DO WE GO ABOUT GETTING BETTER COMMUNICATION [INAUDIBLE].
>> LET ME COMMENT ON THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A DISTINCT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOUSES IN THIS DISTRICTS AND THOSE OUTSIDE.
YOU MIGHT HAVE A 1974 HOUSE THAT IS BEING DEMOLISHED.
IS THAT SOMETHING YOU WOULD WANT TO HEAR ABOUT?
>> YES, [NOISE] WE WOULD TAKE ANY AND ALL HOUSES, BUT RIGHT NOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THE TWO THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT, THEY'RE ALL PRE 1900 STORM SURVIVORS.
THEY BOTH HAVE NOTICES ON THEIR FORM [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT NOW OR ON STATE STRUCTURES.
AGAIN, WE COULDN'T EVEN FIND THE MUNICIPAL CASE WHEN WE SEARCHED IT THIS MORNING BECAUSE THE ADDRESS.
WE WERE TOLD THAT ON PURPOSE, YOU GUYS BLANKED OUT THE ADDRESSES FOR THOSE TYPES OF QUOTES.
>> WE WERE SURPRISED [LAUGHTER] NOT TO BE ABLE TO FIND IT.
>> AGAIN, GOING BACK, [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING [INAUDIBLE].
>>WELL, AGAIN, WITH 1826 AVENUE K, THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WE WENT THROUGH. [INAUDIBLE]
>>THAT ONE WE SAVED [OVERLAPPING].
AGAIN, IT WAS A LOT OF WORD OF MOUTH WHERE WE ENDED UP AND AGAIN, IT WAS I THINK ONE MUNICIPAL BOARD MEETING AWAY FROM GETTING THEIR DEMOLITION ORDER.
WE JUST WORKED WITH THE CITY ON THAT CASE TO STATE THE DEMOLITION ORDER AS MUCH AS THEY WOULD ALLOW US.
AGAIN IT WAS EVERY MONTH MICHAEL AND MYSELF GOING INTO MUNICIPAL COURT AND GIVING UPDATES TO [INAUDIBLE] IT'S JUST THE COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN HAPPENS SOMEWHERE.
[01:05:01]
IT MIGHT'VE BEEN PRIOR STAFF.>> IT'S ALSO THERE'S MULTIPLE PARTNERS [INAUDIBLE].
BUT FROM A STANDPOINT OF COMMUNICATION [INAUDIBLE]
>> THAT'S WHY IT'S CONCERNING FOR US.
E SPECIALLY WHEN IT HAPPENS IN [INAUDIBLE] SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT WE DON'T LIKE WHERE IT'S GOING.
ESPECIALLY WITH STAFF HAVING SEEN AND WORKED IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, RESERVATION AND A REHAB ROOM.
IT'S GREAT UNTIL IT STARTS TURNING MORE THAN DEMOLITION AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO GET AHEAD OF, IS NOT SEEING THE LOOPHOLE IN OUR RESERVATION CODE [INAUDIBLE] WHERE THEY COULD BYPASS COMING BEFORE THE NETWORK DEMOLITION AND JUST FINDING A [INAUDIBLE].
>> BUT WE JUST START WITH THE 12TH STREET HOUSE [INAUDIBLE].
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY I THINK WE FLUSHED THIS OUT, IF WE WANT TO GO MORE MAYBE WE SHOULD SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP WHERE WE CAN FLUSH OUT [INAUDIBLE]
>>NO MATTER WHAT, IT'S THE PROPERTY OWNERS HOUSE.
IF THEY SAY, I WANT MY HOUSE TOMORROW, I DON'T WANT TO MESS WITH THAT ANYMORE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET THEIR PERMISSION TO COME AND TAKE STUFF OUT OF THEIR HOUSE.
[BACKGROUND] IF IT'S GOING TO BE DEMOLISHED AND PEOPLE DECIDE THAT THEY WANT TO SALVAGE IT.
>> YEAH, BUT THEY GET WHATEVER IS [INAUDIBLE].
[01:10:16]
>> I JUST FEEL LIKE THE HOMEOWNER WOULD BE ALLOWED TO SAY, NO, THIS IS MY HOUSE, LIKE MY DAD BUILT IT, MY GREAT GRANDPA BUILT IT.
I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO TAKE ANYTHING ON IT, JUST TEAR IT DOWN AND I WANT IT TO DIE THERE.
>> USUALLY THERE'S A DEMOLITION ORDER ON IT [INAUDIBLE].
>> THE HOMEOWNER ACTUALLY SAID YES [INAUDIBLE].
>> I'D LIKE TO AT THIS TIME TABLE THE CONVERSATION UNTIL WE GET BECAUSE I KNOW IN A WORKSHOP IT'S GOING TO BE A PROCESS AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT NEEDS TO TAKE OFF AGAIN.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING? NO? THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.