[00:00:02]
ALL RIGHT. I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
[ Landmark Commission on December 5, 2022.]
TODAY IS MONDAY, DECEMBER 5TH, THE YEAR 2022, AND THE TIME IS 4:00.SO I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER, AND WE'LL START WITH ATTENDANCE.
COMMISSIONER ALBERSTADT IS ABSENT.
PRESENT. COMMISSIONER FLINT-BUDDE.
COMMISSIONER KERSTING IS ABSENT AS WELL AS VICE CHAIRPERSON LANG.
PRESENT. COMMISSIONER STETZEL-THOMPSON.
PRESENT. COMMISSIONER SWANSON.
AND COUNCIL MEMBER COLLINS IS ABSENT.
AND PLEASE NOTE, DUE TO THE ABSENCES, BOTH ALTERNATES WILL BE VOTING TODAY.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH ANY OF THE CASES THAT WE ARE HEARING TODAY? NO. OKAY.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. I ASSUME EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES.
DOES ANYBODY SEE ANY CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE? NO. EVERYTHING TIGHT AND TIDY.
OK MINUTES ARE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.
SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO, I GUESS, BEFORE WE GO ON, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, CATHERINE? NO PUBLIC COMMENT WAS RECEIVED.
GREAT. OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I'M ASSUMING EVERYBODY'S HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO. YOU DON'T DO THE.
OKAY. YOU ALL HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE CASE.
DOES ANYBODY WISH TO HAVE THIS CASE TAKEN OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PUT ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA? SEEING NONE OK.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? SHARON HAS MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
SARAH HAS MADE A SECOND TO SECOND.
I THINK WE ARE READY FOR A VOTE.
ALL IN FAVOR? VOTE IS UNANIMOUS.
OKAY, GREAT. WELL, JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT COUNCIL MEMBER COLLINS HAS JOINED US.
MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEARINGS.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS CASE TO ALLOW TIME FOR STAFF TO DO A FURTHER REVIEW OF THIS CASE. AS I STATED, WHAT THE CASE NUMBER AND ADDRESS WAS, I HAD A DESCRIPTION OF THE SO HOW CAN THE BOARD.
I JUST SAID THERE WERE ITEMS THAT NEEDED FURTHER REVIEW BEFORE THE CASE WAS READY.
DO YOU WANT ME TO STATE WHAT THE SPECIFIC ITEMS I HAVE CONCERNS ARE? WELL I WOULD LIKE THE CASE OKAY. BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY INFORMATION THAT'S PRESENTED ON THE RECORD FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS TO EITHER DEFER IT.
YEAH, THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CURRENT CASE AS PRESENTED TO US THAT NEEDS TO BE DEFERRED.
IT'S NOT INCLUDED ON THIS CASE AT THIS TIME, BUT IT IS PART OF THIS PROPERTY.
I THINK WE HAVE TO HEAR IT. OKAY.
WE HAVE TO HEAR THE CASE THAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
OKAY. THEN IF ANOTHER MOTION IS TO COME THEREAFTER, THEN IT CAN COME THEREAFTER.
BUT YOU LITERALLY HAVE TO HEAR THE CASE THAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO CASE 22LC-048 1015 SEALY AVENUE.
SIX NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RETURNED.
PHOTOS OF THE HOUSE PRIOR TO THE WORK WERE PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENT A.
THE APPLICANT HAS REMOVED DECORATIVE COLUMNS, RAILINGS AND TRIM ON THE PORCH.
THE FRONT DOOR HAS ALSO BEEN REPLACED.
PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
CONFORMANCE, STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
[00:05:05]
IN THIS CASE, THE TURNED PORCH COLUMNS AND TRIM AT THE PORCH ROOF AND APPROPRIATE FOR A NATIONAL FOLK/CRAFTSMAN STYLE HAVE BEEN REPLACED WITH INAPPROPRIATE COLUMNS AND THE TRIM REMOVED STAFF RECOMMENDATION DUE TO NON CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE REQUEST BE DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.AND THEN TWO IS A STANDARD CONDITION REGARDING APPEALS.
AND THEN WE HAVE PICTURES THAT WERE UNDATED BUT PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
AND THEN WE'VE GOT THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST AND TO THE WEST.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I OWN THIS PROPERTY.
THANK YOU. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'M SORRY. I HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF AND MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WERE GOING TO CONSIDER IN THE LATER ISSUE, BUT I HAD A QUESTION OF WHY THE WINDOW ISSUE WASN'T ADDRESSED IN THE STAFF'S COMMENTS.
THE WINDOWS DO NOT APPEAR TO BE THE HISTORIC TWO OVER TWO WOODEN WINDOWS.
STAFF'S BEEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT.
THEY CLAIM THAT THEY HAVEN'T MADE ANY CHANGES TO THE WINDOWS, SO THAT IS AN OUTSTANDING ITEM.
BUT THIS APPLICATION IS JUST FOR THE PORCH AND THE DOOR.
SO THOSE WERE SOME OF MY CONCERNS AS WELL.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO COME UP.
ARE YOU, MR. HADLEY? YES, MA'AM, I AM MR. CHRIS HADLEY.
HADLEY? TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROPERTY.
SO THIS PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED PROBABLY ABOUT SIX, SEVEN MONTHS AGO.
THESE PICTURES THAT ARE ACTUALLY CURRENT ARE WHEN I THE STAIRCASE AND THE EXISTING RAILINGS AND ALSO THE FRONT DOOR AND THE WINDOWS WERE ALL IN COMPLETE DISREPAIR.
THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN VACANT FOR OVER TEN YEARS.
OKAY. SO IT WAS UNSALVAGEABLE AT THAT POINT TO REPAIR THOSE.
THE WINDOWS, WHICH THEY'RE NOT IN THIS REPORT.
THE ONLY THING THAT WAS DONE TO THE WINDOWS WAS REMOVAL OF THE SHUTTERS.
THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DONE WITH THOSE WINDOWS.
SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE GOING FORWARD.
AS FAR AS THE FRONT DOOR, THERE'S BEEN MANY COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBOR NEXT DOOR THAT YOU COULD GET IN TOUCH WITH AND ASK ABOUT THAT DOOR NOT EVEN CLOSING OR BEING ABLE TO BE LOCKED BECAUSE THERE'S NO LOCKING MECHANISM ON IT AND IT HAD HOLES IN IT, WHICH IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE IN THAT PICTURE.
BUT THERE WAS NO REPLACEMENT OF THAT DOOR.
SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW THAT CAN BE KEPT.
SO WITHOUT BEING MY AESTHETIC.
[00:10:03]
AND HAVE PEOPLE ACTUALLY BE INSIDE IT AND RESIDE.OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. DONNA, MAY I ASK, SINCE HE RAISED THE QUESTION ABOUT THE WINDOWS, MAY I ASK HIM ABOUT THAT? IT'S NOT ON OUR CASE REVIEW, SO I'M GOING TO BOW AND CURTSEY FIRST LIKE A GOOD GIRL.
IT'S A QUESTION THAT THE COMMISSION HAS.
I JUST WOULDN'T GET TOO FAR INTO IT.
I JUST WANTED TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION.
YOU SAID WHEN YOU REMOVED THOSE, YOU JUST ADDED A CROSSBAR.
NO, THERE ALREADY THAT'S TWO SEPARATE WINDOWS.
YOU JUST CANNOT SEE THE CROSSBAR BETWEEN THE WINDOWS RIGHT NOW WITH THE SHUTTERS SO WERE THEY ORIGINALLY ONE OVER ONE PANELS THAT MOVED UP AND DOWN.
AND THAT'S WHAT AND THEY WERE ALWAYS FIXED.
THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW. THEY DID NOT MOVE.
NOTHING, NO WINDOWS HAS BEEN REPLACED.
THEY'VE ONLY BEEN RESTORED IN THAT ENTIRE HOUSE.
YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT.
JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, DO YOU HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE WINDOWS WHEN YOU TOOK THESE? I SENT THEM TO CATHERINE GORMAN AND ALSO TO ADRIEL OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
BUT THEY'RE ALL SUBMITTED THROUGH.
AND CONSTRUCTION TO PERMITTING.
IT'S BEEN THERE FOR SEVERAL MONTHS.
OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OK, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I DON'T THINK SO UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
SO. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS.
WELL FIRST, LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS CASE? NO. ANYBODY ONLINE THAT WOULD MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS CASE? NO. OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS CASE TO ALLOW TIME FOR STAFF TO DO A FURTHER REVIEW, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S NOT WE HAVEN'T REALLY TOTALLY BUTTONED THIS THING UP. THAT'S MY MOTION.
ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY.
AND SO THAT WHEN WE DO MAKE A DECISION AND IT COMES BACK TO US, THERE'S NO FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED.
EVERYTHING'S BUTTONED UP TIGHT.
OKAY. I THINK WE'RE READY FOR A VOTE.
ALL IN FAVOR. VOTE IS UNANIMOUS.
I GUESS. I HATE TO SET A TIME, BUT WOULD THAT BE JANUARY THE THIRD WEEK IN JANUARY, OR WERE YOU? WELL, WE HAVE A MEETING ON DECEMBER THE 16TH.
OKAY. SO WE'LL JUST WAIT FOR THAT OKAY. GREAT. THANKS.
YOU'RE CORRECT. OK 22LC-051 15TH STREET IS A REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALTERATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE.
THERE WERE SIX PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, ZERO RETURNED.
PLEASE SEE EXHIBIT A OF YOUR STAFF REPORT FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL.
PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
CONFORMANCE STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
THE DOORS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED ARE TOO DECORATIVE FOR THIS STYLE AND AGE OF HOUSE.
HOWEVER, SHOULD THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FIND THE REQUEST CONFORMS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MAY BE APPROPRIATE AND THOSE CONDITIONS ARE LISTED FOR YOU IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
AND THEN HERE ARE THE DOORS, THE CURRENT DOORS.
THE DOOR ON THE LEFT IS THE FIRST FLOOR DOOR AND THE DOOR ON THE RIGHT IS THE SECOND FLOOR DOOR.
[00:15:02]
AND THEN WE HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES THAT SHOW THE DOORS THAT WERE PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT.SO PATRICK CAN JUST RUN THROUGH THOSE.
AND WE HAVE THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, TO THE EAST AND TO THE SOUTH.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFFS REPORT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WELL, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION REGARDING THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PROPOSED DOORS.
I DID DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ONLINE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE STYLE OF HOME AND THE DOORS, AND IT WAS KIND OF DIFFICULT TO SEE REALLY GOOD OR TO FIND REALLY GOOD EXAMPLES OF OF DOORS.
BUT I DID FIND IT WASN'T ANY ONE DOOR STYLE.
AND I KIND OF QUESTIONED IF SOME MAYBE THE DOOR WITH THE MULTICOLORED GLASS APPEARED TO BE CLOSE TO THE SAME ERA AS WHEN THIS HOME WAS CONSTRUCTED.
AND I WASN'T SURE THAT IT WAS NOT IN CHARACTER, YOU KNOW, WITH THE BUILDING.
I WASN'T. I THOUGHT MAYBE THAT WAS CLOSE.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? JUST WONDERED WHAT STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND AS AN APPROPRIATE DOOR.
WOULD IT BE A SOLID PANELED DOOR? THERE IS A HOUSE THAT'S SIMILAR TO THIS ON THE 16TH STREET BETWEEN WINNIE AND CHURCH HAS SOLID PANEL DOORS.
I THINK THAT STAFF NOTED IN THE REPORT WHAT THEY WOULD RECOMMEND.
THERE IS [INAUDIBLE] DESIGN GUIDELINES AS WELL.
WE'RE ONLY BEING ASKED AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THOSE DOORS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS.
THEY CAN ALWAYS COME BACK IF THE DECISION IS NOT ALLOWED, THEY CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND MAKE ANOTHER REQUEST AND BRING FURTHER INFORMATION.
BUT WE ARE ONLY BEING ASKED ABOUT THE SPECIFIC DOORS ON THAT SPECIFIC HOUSE.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. OKAY.
I'M JEFF. HOLD ON MR. HAMM, DO YOU MIND SIGNING IN FOR US, PLEASE FOR THE RECORD ? ON THESE DOORS RIGHT HERE.
IF YOU GO TWO STREETS DOWN FOR ME ON 15TH, THERE'S A HISTORICAL HOUSE.
THAT'S RIGHT ON THE CORNER. IT'S THE ONE.
THE TURTLE ON IT? YES. IN THE FRONT.
I AGREE THAT THE OTHER ONES THAT WE WERE SHOWING THE PICTURES OF ARE TOO ORNATE.
BUT THESE ARE PRETTY CLOSE TO THE HOUSE THAT'S OWNED BY THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE ONE THAT'S ON 15TH AND POST OFFICE.
IT'S THE EASTON HISTORIC DISTRICT ASSOCIATION? YES. OKAY.
SO THAT COTTAGE IS ACTUALLY MUCH OLDER AND A DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURE, AND IT BELONGS TO A NONPROFIT.
SO IT'S NOT PART OF THE CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS JUST A SOCIAL NONPROFIT.
BUT I AGREE WITH YOU. IT'S GOT A SIMILAR DOOR.
BUT I HEAR WHERE YOU ARE GOING WITH THIS.
I HEAR WHERE YOU ARE GOING WITH IT.
SO. BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT WAS THE SAME YEAR.
THANK YOU. YEAH. YOU KNOW, THAT HOUSE WAS ACTUALLY PICKED UP AND MOVED THERE.
SO I THINK IT'S 1870S AND I THINK THIS ONE IS ALSO AROUND 1870S.
IT'S REALLY A PRETTY LITTLE HOUSE NOW.
YEAH. REALLY IS A PRETTY HOUSE.
HOLD ON. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? IS THIS FOUR DIFFERENT DOORS? I'M SORRY. IS THIS FOUR DIFFERENT DOORS, LIKE THE ONES WITH THE STAINED GLASS IN IT? THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT DOORS, CORRECT? YES. AND YOUR ASK.
[00:20:03]
AND THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT DOORS ALSO RIGHT? OKAY. WHICH ONES WERE YOU WANTING TO USE? I THINK THOSE ARE TWO ORNATE IT'S THE ONES WITH THE STAINED GLASS AROUND IT.FOR THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM FLOOR? OKAY. AND WHICH WOULD YOU SPECIFY FOR THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
IF YOU HAD TO MAKE A REQUEST ON THOSE TWO DOORS, WHICH WOULD YOU SPECIFY FOR UPSTAIRS AND DOWNSTAIRS? OH, I GUESS THE ONE THAT'S NOT PAINTED FOR THE DOWNSTAIRS AND THE WHITE ONE FOR THE UPSTAIRS.
OKAY. WERE THESE PRESENTED AS OPTION A OR OPTION B WHEN YOU MADE THIS APPLICATION? NO, I JUST PUT ALL THE PICTURES.
ALL THE POSSIBILITIES OF WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WE ONLY HAVE ONE DOOR WITH MULTICOLORED GLASS WELL, WE HAVE NEITHER.
BUT THOSE ARE TWO THAT ARE FOR SALE THAT IF THEY'RE NOT SOLD, I WOULD BUY.
BUT MY QUESTION YEAH. JUST SO THEY KIND OF LOOK THE SAME.
SO BUT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET TWO OF EACH STYLE, ONE ABOVE AND BE CONSISTENT IN OTHER WORDS.
YES. SO I GUESS IF I UNDERSTAND FROM YOU, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OMIT BY YOUR OWN WORDS THAT MORE DECORATIVE ONES ARE.
OH YEAH. SO AND SO. NOW YOU'RE ASKING, WOULD WE CONSIDER THESE AS A POSSIBILITY BASED ON YOUR FINDINGS AND WHAT THE COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING? IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT 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 STAFF AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION PLEASE.
DOES ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? I WILL. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY THIS BASED ON THE BOARD'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
IS THAT RIGHT? DUE TO DESIGN, NOT CONFORMING WITH DESIGN STANDARDS.
YES. IS THERE A SECOND ON THIS MOTION? MOTION FAILS.
WOULD SOMEONE ELSE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS CASE? OKAY. MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THESE DOORS OR LIKE.
OKAY. I'M GOING TO SECOND THAT MOTION TO SAY WE WOULD CONSIDER A SIMPLE DOOR TWO OF A LIKE, PENDING STAFF'S REVIEW.
PENDING STAFF'S REVIEW, BECAUSE I THINK THE STAFF NEEDS TO STILL MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD BE LOOKING AT TWO DOORS THAT ARE LIKE ABOVE AND COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BELOW. AND AGAIN, THESE DOORS MAY NOT EVEN BE AVAILABLE BY THE TIME YOU GO TO BUY THEM.
YOU NEVER KNOW. SOMEBODY COULD HAVE RUSHED IN AND GOT THEM TODAY, RIGHT? SO I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND THIS MOTION WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT STAFF STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO REVIEW THE FINAL DOORS THAT ARE GOING TO GO IN. WILL YOU ACCEPT THAT? YES, I DO. OKAY.
ONE OPPOSED THE MOTION PASSES.
MOVING ON TO 22LC-052 1124 CHURCH AVENUE FOR REQUEST A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FROM MODIFICATIONS TO AN EXISTING GARAGE.
THERE ARE FIVE PUBLIC NOTICES SENT AND NONE OF THOSE WERE RETURNED.
THE EXISTING GARAGE IS NOT NOTED AS BEING HISTORIC IN THE HISTORIC SITES INVENTORY.
PLEASE NOTE IN THE STAFF REPORT THE PROPOSED MATERIALS TO BE USED FOR THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION.
[00:25:03]
STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST GENERALLY CONFORMS TO DESIGN STANDARDS.ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS AND WILL BE SUBORDINATE TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND AS OF COURSE IS LOCATED IN THE ALLEY AND LOCATION NOT TYPICALLY VISIBLE REAR FAÇADE WERE MUCH MORE FLEXIBILITY IS ALLOWED.
THE APPLICANT ALSO PROVIDED EXHIBITS FOR THE WINDOWS AND DOORS.
THE DESIGN STANDARDS NOTE THAT ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
IN THIS CASE, NON HISTORIC CONSTRUCTION AND VINYL WINDOWS IN THIS CASE ARE ALSO ACTUALLY PERMISSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE NON HISTORIC NATURE OF THE STRUCTURE AND ITS LOCATION.
MATERIALITY OF THE PROPOSED DOOR IS NOT PROVIDED, HOWEVER, DESIGN SHOWN IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE DRAWINGS CONFORM TO DESIGN STANDARD BEING A SIMPLE FLUSH DOOR WITH A LIGHT . THE APPLICANT LIKEWISE DOES NOT PROVIDE DETAILS REGARDING THE STAIRS AND HANDRAIL, SO THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PROPOSED STAIRS AND HANDRAIL BE OF WOOD WITH THE TYPICAL SIMPLE SQUARE DESIGN THAT WE TYPICALLY RECOMMEND HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND SHOWN IN THE STAFF REPORT.
SO OF COURSE THIS IS THE FRONT HOUSE FOR REFERENCE.
AND OF COURSE NO WORK IS BEING PROPOSED AT THIS TIME ON THE FRONT HOUSE.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO HERE ARE SOME ISOMETRIC MODELS OF THE PROPOSED ADDITION.
THE SHINGLES, THE PROPOSED WINDOWS AND DOOR.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFFS REPORT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ONE CLARIFICATION, THE STAFF REPORT REFERS TO IT AS 1126, AND I THINK IT'S 1124.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. OKAY.
I AM GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF THE APPLICANT, MR. GRIZZLE. HE IS NOT HERE.
HE'S NOT HERE, ARE YOU REPRESENTING HIM? YES. WOULD YOU MIND STEPPING FORWARD, GIVING US YOUR NAME, SIGNING IN AND TELLING US ABOUT THIS PROJECT, PLEASE? MY NAME IS DWAYNE CROW AND I'M WITH CROW CONSTRUCTION.
WE'RE THE ONE PROPOSING THE WORK ON IT.
THEY WANT TO MAKE IT INTO A MOTHER IN LAW SUITE.
SO SIMPLE DESIGN, YOU KNOW, THE STRUCTURE IS NOT HISTORIC.
SO WE THOUGHT IT'D BE PRETTY EASY TO DO THAT FOR THEM.
IT IS. IT'S YOU SHOULD SEE IT INSIDE.
YES. IT'S ACTUALLY VERY WELL TAKEN CARE OF.
YEAH, I WANTED TO BUY IT WHENEVER SHE SHOWED IT TO ME.
THE ROOFLINE IS SO UNIQUE FOR SUCH A LITTLE HOUSE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. CROW? NO, I DID.
I THINK WE CHANGED THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE HARDIE BACKER JUST BE SMOOTH.
IT'S NO LONGER THAT SPECIFIC ONE.
I REMEMBER WE USED TO HAVE A SMOOTH, HARDIE BACKER THAT WE RECOMMENDED, AND I THINK THEY STOPPED.
AND IT'S JUST NOW WE JUST SAY SMOOTH, RIGHT? SO WE USED TO ALWAYS RECOMMEND THE USE OF THE ARTISAN LINE BY HARDIE OR SIMILAR PRODUCT, BUT THEY DON'T MAKE IT ANYMORE.
THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.
I'VE HEARD THAT. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY.
IS ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE? LOOKING AT ALL PEOPLE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. BEAUTIFUL HOUSE.
CAN'T WAIT TO SEE HOW Y'ALL PROGRESS ON THIS.
SARAH. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CASE 22LC-052 PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND. JANE SECONDS IT.
DISCUSSION? NO, I THINK WE'RE READY FOR A VOTE.
ALL IN FAVOR? THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUS. OKAY.
OKAY. NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO 22LC-053 1416 BALL.
THEY HAVE ASKED FOR A REQUEST TO DEFER THIS TO A LATER DATE.
[00:30:04]
TO DEFER. OKAY.DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SARAH, SECOND IT.
ALL IN FAVOR? VOTE IS UNANIMOUS.
ALL RIGHTY. SO AS STATED, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A DESIGNATION OF GALVESTON LANDMARK.
THERE ARE 40 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, FIVE RETURNED.
WE HAVE GONE FROM POSSIBLY ZERO CORNER STORES ON OUR LANDMARKS LIST TO TWO IN AS MANY MONTHS.
SO IT'S FUNNY HOW THINGS FLOW.
SO THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING DESIGNATION AS A LANDMARK.
IT IS, OF COURSE, A VERY PRETTY TYPICAL CORNER STORE.
THERE'S SOME LITTLE INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT IT AS WELL.
THE BENDIXEN-PROSCH CORNER STORE IN RESIDENCE DATES TO 1892; 1899'S INSURANCE RECORDS NOTE A TWO STORY FRAME BUILDING WITH A ONE STORY WAREHOUSE ADDITION, WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN DEMOLISHED AND A TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL WING TO THE EAST.
GEORGE BENDIXEN WAS BORN IN GERMANY, CAME TO THE UNITED STATES IN 1877 AFTER A TIME IN LAKE CHARLES, LOUISIANA, HE RELOCATED TO GALVESTON AND OPENED HIS FIRST CORNER STORE IN 1884. BUT HE BUILT THIS CORNER STORE, WHICH IS HIS OWN AND ATTACHED STRUCTURE IN 1892 STORE OFFERED GROCERIES, NOTIONS AND SHOES.
THE FAMILY, INCLUDING SEVEN CHILDREN, RESIDE IN THE UPSTAIRS.
IN 1920, MR. BENDIXEN SOLD THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY TO FELLOW GROCER BEN PROSCH.
BEN PROSCH, ALSO BORN IN GERMANY AND IMMIGRATED TO GALVESTON, 1886.
HE ALSO USED THIS PROPERTY, HIS BAKERY AND STOREFRONT UNTIL 1928.
LATER, THE BUILDING WAS OWNED BY ANOTHER RETAILER, LAZAR LERNER.
SO IT HAS A VERY LONG HISTORY AS A RETAIL CORNER STORE SPACE.
BENDIXEN-PROSCH CORNER STORE AND RESIDENT IS TYPICAL OF CORNER STORES, AS WE NOTED.
THERE ARE NO HISTORIC PHOTOS OF THE STRUCTURE, BUT THE SANBORN INSURANCE MAP SHOW THE STRUCTURE ONCE HAD AN AWNING EXTENDING OVER THE SIDEWALK, WHICH OF COURSE, HAS SINCE BEEN LOST. ALSO VERY COMMON TO CORNER STORES.
OF COURSE, CORNER STORES WERE IMPORTANT AS IDENTIFIABLE LANDMARKS.
THEY PROVIDE MUCH NEEDED DAILY SHOPPING FOR AREA RESIDENTS AND ALSO SERVE AS LOCAL GATHERING PLACES.
OF COURSE, PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HEAR THIS REQUEST AT THE DECEMBER 6TH MEETING AS WELL.
CITY COUNCIL HAS A FINAL DECISION AND THEY WILL CONSIDER THIS AT THE JANUARY 26, 2023 MEETING.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH STANDARD CONDITION ONE AND WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS.
SO HERE WE HAVE THE MAIN STRUCTURE, SO TO SPEAK, SEEN FROM THE CORNER.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFFS REPORT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE ONE QUESTION, AND THAT IS.
LET ME GET BACK TO WHERE IT'S UNDERLINED HERE.
YOU STATE IN THE STANDARD CONDITION THAT THIS PROPERTY WILL BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVED BY LANDMARK COMMISSION AND MUST CONFORM TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES. IS THAT REVIEW AND APPROVAL NOW OR WILL THAT COME AT A LATER TIME BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS? MY QUESTION WOULD BE DID THE APPLICANT CHANGE THE DOWNSTAIRS WINDOWS? AND DOES STAFF KNOW IF THE APPLICANT CHANGED THOSE DOWNSTAIRS WINDOWS? I AM NOT AWARE OFF HAND.
IS THAT NO, THEY DIDN'T OR NO, WE DON'T KNOW.
WE DON'T KNOW. WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE ONE OF THE HIGH WATERMARKS IS DOES ENOUGH OF THE HISTORIC UNIQUENESS REMAIN IN THE STRUCTURE TO RECOMMEND THIS TO GO FORWARD?
[00:35:06]
THAT'S MY ONLY THOUGHT.DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. I WOULD OPEN UP A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT THERE'S NO MORE PUBLIC.
SO I GUESS I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND ASK FOR A MOTION ON THIS CASE.
I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE IT PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS A LANDMARK.
DISCUSSION, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? NO. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED.
IT'S STUNNING, ACTUALLY, IT'S VERY PRETTY.
BUT I JUST WISH THE LOWER WINDOWS WERE STILL THERE.
BUT GOD BLESS THEM FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD AND WANTING TO GET IT LANDMARKED AND PROTECTED.
SO SOMEBODY DIDN'T COME AND LOP THE TOP FLOOR OFF OF IT.
[LAUGHTER] I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
IS BLACK THE NEW BEIGE? APPARENTLY IT IS.
AND THEY MUST ALL BE GOING FOR THAT SAME COLOR OR IT'S MY OLD EYES.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S THE SAME COLOR.
IT'S VERY TRENDY. I CAN'T IMAGINE THE ELECTRIC BILLS.
WELL, AT LEAST IT'S NOT PURPLE.
SO, MADAM CHAIR, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF ANNOUNCEMENTS, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK YOU IF WE HAD SOME ANNOUNCEMENTS.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF ANNOUNCEMENTS THEY ARE ALL UNFORTUNATELY, DEPARTURES.
SO WE'VE HAD TWO RESIGNATIONS IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO WE WILL BE VERY SORRY TO SEE THEM GO.
WE'LL GET PLAQUES FOR THEM AND HAVE THEM BACK AT A LATER DATE TO RECOGNIZE THEIR SERVICE.
TONER WASN'T WITH US VERY LONG, BUT STEPHANIE CERTAINLY WAS.
YEAH, BUT HE WAS ALSO A VALUABLE MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION.
SO I'VE SEEN ALREADY THAT COUNCILMAN COLLINS HAS ASKED FOR SOME APPOINTMENTS IN JANUARY.
WE'LL PUT THIS ON THE JANUARY AGENDA FOR APPOINTMENT.
OKAY. AND WHAT ABOUT PLACING OUR ALTERNATES ONTO.
WE WILL WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT AS WELL IN JANUARY.
AND DO WE HAVE CASES FOR THE THIRD WEEK IN DECEMBER? WE HAVE CASES FOR DECEMBER.
CURRENTLY, WE DON'T HAVE ANY SUBMITTED FOR THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY.
SO WELL THE DEADLINE IS 5:00 TODAY, SO WE'LL LET YOU KNOW IF ANYTHING HAS BEEN SUBMITTED.
AND DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO? I HAVE ONE MORE ANNOUNCEMENT. [LAUGHTER] OKAY.
I KNEW IT WAS COMING. IT WAS COMING.
I'M SAD TO ANNOUNCE THAT PATRICK COLLINS IS LEAVING US.
HE HAS GOTTEN A JOB IN MASSACHUSETTS, WHICH IS MUCH CLOSER TO HIS HOME IN CONNECTICUT.
THANK YOU. VERY, VERY PATIENT WHEN I CALL.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THEY'D LIKE TO ADD FOR DISCUSSION? I HAVE A QUESTION. TONER AND STEPHANIE'S SPOTS, DID THEY HAVE LIKE, A TITLE? I MEAN, DID THEY HAVE TO FIT A REQUIREMENT? I THINK THEY WERE BOTH PROPERTY OWNERS.
THEY WEREN'T ONE THAT'S LIKE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.
YEAH. OKAY. SO WE'LL VERIFY THAT THE ALTERNATES QUALIFY FOR THE OPEN POSITIONS.
GOTCHA. YEAH. AND THEN ONE THING I WANTED TO SAY WAS THAT ONCE WE GET THE NEW APPOINTMENTS, WE'LL PUT THE VICE CHAIRMANSHIP ONTO THE AGENDA TO VOTE AND GET A NEW VICE CHAIR. YEAH, I'LL BE THINKING ABOUT THAT.
ARE YOU SERIOUS? YEAH. YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE.
HAUL ME IN HERE WITH AN ACCENT.
HAUL ME IN HERE WITH AN OXYGEN TANK, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ON THE DISCUSSION AT THE NEXT MEETING THE POSSIBILITY OF A FUTURE WORKSHOP IN JANUARY.
I THINK WE HAVE SO MANY NEW MEMBERS AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME MORE NEW MEMBERS.
MAYBE WE SHOULD SAVE IT FOR WHEN THE NEW MEMBERS COME ON.
BUT I THINK WE NEED A COMMUNITY WORKSHOP JUST TO WORK AS A COHESIVE GROUP AND TO VISIT SOME OF THE THINGS LIKE THE ITEMS THAT I BROUGHT UP TODAY THAT I THINK MAKE US MORE EFFECTIVE AND MORE DESERVING OF REPRESENTING GALVESTON AND LANDMARK COMMISSION FASHION THAT THEY EXPECT OF US.
[00:40:03]
KIND OF, YOU KNOW, ROUGH OVER SOME OF THESE THINGS.NEED TO BE THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY.
BECAUSE I'M HAVING SURGERY THE SECOND WEEK.
WELL, BRING YOUR CALENDARS TO THE NEXT MEETING.
OTHERWISE, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
OKAY. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.