>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY TO
[Landmark Commission on April 3, 2023.]
[00:00:03]
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.TODAY IS MONDAY, APRIL 3RD, 2023, AND THE TIME IS FOUR O'CLOCK.
WE WILL START WITH ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE.
OKAY. YOU USUALLY TAKE THE ATTENDANCE OR CALL EVERYBODY'S NAME OUT SO THAT IT GOES FOR THE RECORD THAT THEY'RE HERE FOR ANYBODY WHO'S LISTENING.
>> DO YOU WANT TO DO A ROLL CALL?
>> OKAY. COMMISSIONER ALBERSTADT IS ABSENT. COMMISSIONER BAKER?
>> COMMISSIONER STETZEL-THOMPSON?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER COLLINS IS ABSENT.
I WILL NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF COMMISSIONER ALBERTSTED, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON WILL BE A VOTING MEMBER TODAY.
>> DOES EVERYBODY HAVE THEIR MIC TURNED ON? I THINK AT ROLL-CALL, I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY'S GREEN BUTTON WAS ON.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTERESTS WITH ANY OF THE CASES WE HAVE TODAY? SEEING NONE. WE'LL MOVE ON.
HAS EVERYONE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING? DO YOU SEE OR FIND THAT THERE ARE ANY CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE? ANY CORRECTIONS?
>> SEEING NONE. MINUTES STAND APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.
NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
CATHERINE, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT WAS RECEIVED.
>> OKAY. GREAT. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
FIRST ON THE CONSENT AGENDA IS 23 LC-009, WHICH IS 11 17 CHURCH AGAIN, THIS IS A CONSENT AGENDA.
THE STAFF DOES NOT MAKE A PRESENTATION ON THIS.
DO YOU FIND THAT THERE'S ANYTHING IN THIS CASE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE US TO TAKE OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PUT ONTO THE REGULAR AGENDA?
>> THIS WAS ONE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BUT EXPIRED.
>> OKAY. CAN I GO AHEAD AND CALL FOR A VOTE?
>> ALL IN FAVOR [OVERLAPPING] YOU NEED TO MAKE A MOTION.
>> OKAY. WOULDN'T IT BE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? SHARON IS MAKING THE MOTION ANYBODY SECONDED?
>> OKAY. SHE SECONDED, JANE SECONDED.
ALL IN FAVOR. CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED.
I'LL JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT COUNCIL MEMBER COLLINS HAS JOINED US.
>> OKAY. MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEARINGS.
THE FIRST CASE IS CASE 23 LC-008 IS A LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
THIS IS 22. 22 BERNARDO DE GALVEZ.
HOW MANY P. IT'S REQUESTS FOR DESIGNATION IS GALVESTON LANDMARK, 29 NOTICES WERE SENT, ONE RETURNED TO THAT ONE IN FAVOR.
[NOISE] CONSTRUCTED IN 1909, THE ELOH AND LILLIAN JOHNSON BUNGALOW WAS BUILT BY THE ELOH JOHNSON AS HIS PRIMARY RESIDENCE.
MR. JOHNSON PULLED THE BOOK BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE HOUSE TWO WEEKS BEFORE HE AND LILLIAN WERE MARRIED.
MR. JOHNSON WAS A LAWYER THAT PRACTICE LAW [NOISE] FATHER'S FIRM.
MS. JOHNSON WAS A MEMBER OF THE PROMINENT CRAIN FAMILY FROM VICTORIA, TEXAS.
DANIEL'S FROM VICTORIA, TEXAS.
HE SAYS THAT THE CRANES ARE LIKE THE MOODY'S.
>> ANY RELATION TO THE PLUMBING CRAIN FAMILY? [LAUGHTER]
>> MOST LIKELY THEY WERE OIL AND GAS. [LAUGHTER]
>> BUT THIS MARRIAGE WAS SHORT-LIVED.
THE COUPLE DIVORCED IN 1915 AND MR. JOHNSON REMARRIED JUST SIX MONTHS LATER.
THE HOUSE WAS LATER OWNED BY MEMBERS OF THE SCHULLER FAMILY FOR 74 YEARS.
OTHER REVIEWS, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HEAR THIS REQUEST AT THE APRIL 4TH MEETINGS CITY COUNCIL AS A FINAL DECISION REGARDING REQUESTS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
REQUEST WILL BE HEARD AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 27TH.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH THE STANDARD CONDITION.
IT'S A SWEET LITTLE CRAFTSMEN.
THIS IS THE APARTMENT BUILDING, BUT THE HOUSE ORIGINALLY SAT ON THAT LOT AND FACE 23RD STREET.
THE SECOND OWNER MOVED IT AND THEN CONSTRUCTED THAT APARTMENT BUILDING.
NEXT SLIDE IS THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST.
THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
>> OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? [NOISE] NO. I'M OKAY.
AT THIS POINT I'M A GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP TO THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF THERE IS
[00:05:03]
A MEMBER OR A REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT FOR THIS PROPERTY? NO. OKAY. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT THIS PROPERTY? NO. OKAY. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, BRING IT BACK TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AND ASK FOR A MOTION FOR CASE 23 LC-008.MAKE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, DESIGNATE THIS AS A LOCAL LANDMARK. SARAH?
>> MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CASE 23 LC-008 PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
>> DO I HAVE A SECOND? SHARON IS SECOND THING.
DISCUSSION? NO. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY. WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.
WE HAVE TWO CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THE FIRST ONE IS CASE 23, LC-0101328C.
>> ALREADY THIS IS ACTUALLY ANOTHER CASE THAT HAD COME WE HAD TWO THIS TIME, LET IT COME PREVIOUSLY BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND HAVE EXPIRED WITH NO WORK DONE, AND SO A REHEARING IS REQUIRED.
THIS IS A COA FOR A GARAGE APARTMENT.
THERE ARE FIVE PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, NONE OF THOSE ARE RETURNED.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF SIGHT MODIFICATIONS, INCLUDING THE ADDITION OF A TWO-STORY GARAGE APARTMENT TO THE REAR OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, WHICH IS ON A CORNER LOT OF THE APARTMENT WILL BE ATTACHED AT THE EDGE OF THE EXISTING REPORTS AS SHOWN IN THE STAFF REPORT.
NOTE THAT SIMILAR REQUESTS AND SCOPE WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED UNDER 15 LLC004, WHICH HAS LAPSED WITH NO WORK STARTED.
DESIGN STANDARDS IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT ARE APPLICABLE.
STAFF FINDS OTHER QUESTION I CONFORM TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS PROPOSED WORK ON FORUMS, THE ELEMENTS PRESCRIBING THEM DESIGN STANDARD RAW MATERIALS, SIZE, PLACEMENT, AND USE OF LOWER SCALE ELEMENTS TO CONNECT THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED STRUCTURE.
THE RESULT, THE REQUEST IS NOT CONFORMED DESIGN STANDARDS REGARDING NEW DRIVEWAYS AND GARAGES WHICH ARE TYPICALLY NOT ALLOWED ON PRIMARY STREETS.
THIS APPLICATION SHOWS A PROPOSED DRIVEWAY AND THE GARAGE DOORS BEING ORIENTED TOWARDS 14TH STREET.
STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED THAT THAT BE OMITTED AND GARAGE DOORS BE MODIFIED TO ACCESS THE ALLEY BEHIND.
IN ADDITION TO THE PROPOSED DRAWING, THE PIXEL WINDOWS WOULD DIVIDE LIGHTS, WHILE THIS IS OFTEN APPROPRIATE FOR NEW WINDOWS, HAD TO HISTORIC HOMES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, THE DESIGN STANDARDS RECOMMEND A ONE OVER ONE WINDOW FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT IS IN THE AUDIENCE.
HE MAY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS TO PRESENT.
STATE HAS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THEIR REQUEST FOR THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF CIVILIZATION.
ONE, EXTERIOR MODIFICATION, SO CONFORM TO DESIGN MATERIALS IN PLACE FROM PRESENTING ATTACHMENT, ABLE TO FLY MODIFICATIONS, PROPOSED GARAGE OR PARTIALLY MODIFIED TO PROVIDE ACCESS FROM THE ALLEY ONLY AND THE DRIVEWAY BE EMITTED.
WINDOWS NEW DISHING, SO WILL BE ONE OVER ONE CONFIGURATION PLUS STANDARD CONDITIONS TWO THROUGH FIVE.
WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS [NOISE] SO HERE WE HAVE THE HOUSE ITSELF AS IT LOOKS TODAY.
IT'S FACING SOUTH TOWARD SACRED HEART. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
HERE WE HAVE THE SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWING THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY FACING A 14TH STREET AND THE NEW EDITION, THEY HAD A BUTTS TO THE EXISTING COVERED DECK AREA THERE IN THE BACK.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. HERE WE HAVE THE ELEVATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT LOOKING AT ALL THREE DIRECTIONS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. HERE WE HAVE THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, TO THE EAST, TO THE WEST, AND THEN LOOKING DOWN THE ALLEY BEHIND THIS, WHERE THE PROPOSED ADDITION WOULD BE AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
IN THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION, I REMEMBER THIS GARAGE COMING UP IN THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION.
I DID NOT RECALL THAT IN THAT APPLICATION, THERE WERE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT ARE THERE NOW.
IS THIS THE EXACT SAME APPLICATION THAT WE APPROVED LAST TIME OR THERE HAVE BEEN SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE REQUEST?
>> I BELIEVE THAT THERE WERE SOME OTHER CHANGES AT ONE OF THE ORIGINAL REQUESTS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED UNDER DIFFERENT REVIEWS.
>> THIS IS JUST THE REMAINDER OF THE WORK THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING.
>> OKAY. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF THERE IS A PROPERTY OWNER OR REPRESENTATIVE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND TALK ABOUT THIS.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS?
>> MY NAME IS GREG WITH LOUIS DESIGN GROUP ARCHITECTS [NOISE] HERE IN GALVESTON AND SIGN IN HERE. [NOISE]
[00:10:06]
GOOD TO SEE EVERYONE AND DID PDS ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS GET UPLOADED?>> THEY AREN'T ON THE SCREEN, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN PRINTED OUT AND HANDED OUT TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
>> OKAY. BECAUSE I HAVE LARGE FULL PRINTS.
[OVERLAPPING] SEVEN OF THEM HERE.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THOSE NOTHING LIKE PAPERWORK.
SINCE WE RECEIVED THE PACKAGE OF THE CASE LAST WEEK, THERE'S A COUPLE OF ITEMS WE WANTED TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER AND GIVE YOU SOME MORE INFORMATION AND ADDRESS WHILE WE'RE HERE.
IN ADDITION TO THE APPLICATION THAT YOU HAVE, I BELIEVE THERE'S AN EXHIBIT A WITH THE APPLICATION THAT HAS PHOTOS.
>> OKAY. THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT IN 1881.
I HAVE SOME INFORMATION ON THAT AS WELL.
I DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY OF IT AS FAR AS WHO LIVE THERE AND THAT TYPE THING, WAS BUILT IN 1881.
IN 1912, THERE WAS AN ADDITION BUILT A TWO-STORY HOUSE, APARTMENT BUILT ON THIS VERY CORNER WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING THIS GARAGE TO BE, AND WAS AT ONE POINT CONNECTED TO, IS THAT FEEDBACK?
THE HOUSE AND THAT BUILDING, WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE ON OUR MASTER PLAN FROM THE FIRST SUBMISSION BACK IN 2015.
THE PROJECT THEN WE RESTORED THE ENTIRE HOUSE, HAVE WORKED WITH THE OWNERS, DANNY AND KELLY MORESH SINCE 2013 WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE HOME, TOTAL RESTORATION INSIDE AND OUT, AND MADE THIS SMALL ADDITION ON THE BACK IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE MASTER PLAN THAT WE HAD IN 2015, OR THE NEW GARAGE BUILDING ATTACHES TO THE LITTLE HORTICOG REP YOU SEE IN THE PICTURES HERE.
WE'LL SEE THAT IN SOME OF THE SLIDES.
IN 2015, THAT WAS APPROVED AND IT SHOWED THIS IN THE MASTER PLAN.
BUT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR YEARS AND GOT AN AWARD IN 2018, LANDMARK AWARD, AND NOW THEY ARE READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE GARAGE DEPARTMENT.
THE LAYOUT YOU SEE IN THE SITE PLAN IS WHAT WAS ON THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, AND WE'VE ENHANCED IT SINCE THEN, OF COURSE, GOT MORE DETAIL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.
WHEN I GOT THE APPLICATION, THERE IS AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY NOW THAT GOES UNDER THE HOUSE ON THE 14TH STREET SIDE.
THAT WAS THERE ORIGINALLY ROUTINE THAT THERE USED TO BE A DRIVEWAY.
NEXT TO THAT YOU CAN SEE THE OLD CURB CUT IS STILL THERE. IT'S IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE.
TAKE THAT OUT AND HAVE OUR DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE TO THE NEW GARAGE FROM 14TH STREET BECAUSE THERE IS A LARGE AT&T UTILITY BOX IN THE ALLEY WHICH WOULD BE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GARAGE DOORS IF WE PUT THE GARAGE DOORS ON THE OTHER SIDE, AND THEY HAVE SINCE ADDED ANOTHER ONE SINCE THAT.
WE WENT OVER THERE AND MEASURED ALL OF THAT AND TURNED IN WHAT YOU WILL SEE AS EXHIBIT C IS THIS PACKAGE HERE.
THAT'S THE FIRST EXHIBIT C, AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW WITH RED CIRCLE.
THOSE ARE THE TWO NEW UTILITY BOXES.
WE WENT OUT AND MEASURED AND LOCATED THEM EXACTLY WHERE THEY ARE.
WE'VE GOT SOME BASIC MODELS STARTED ON A COMPUTER, WHICH YOU CAN SEE WHEN YOU TURN IT SHOWS WHERE DO WE HAVE THESE ON THE SCREENS?
>> OKAY. YOU CAN SEE IT SHOWS WHERE THE UTILITY BOXES ARE IN RELATION TO THE NEW BUILDING.
YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING ROOF ON THE HOUSE FROM PHASE 1, AND THE NEW ROOF ON PHASE 2, WHICH WOULD BE YOUR DIRECT CONNECTION INTO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
[NOISE] OF COURSE WILL BE ON THE BACK.
ANOTHER VIEW. THEN YOU CAN SEE THE DRIVEWAYS, THE MID PLANT HERE AND PRETTY LARGE DOORS.
[00:15:01]
HE'S GOT A LARGE ORDER DRIVE, WHICH WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ACCESS FROM THE ALLEY ANYWAY.THERE'S SOME PICTURES WHICH I THINK YOU SAW OFF THERE.
THERE'S ONE RIGHT THERE AND THAT'S IT.
YOU CAN SEE THE UTILITY BOXES.
THAT'S OUR CONCERN WITH THAT AS OUR DESIRE TO INTERRUPT 14TH STREET IS WE ALREADY HAVE ONE ENTRANCE THERE WHICH IS EXISTING.
THEN I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT, YOU'LL SEE AN EXHIBIT D. THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE HOUSE.
THE OWNERS HAD SOME OF THIS GHF HAS HELPED OUT SOME TOO OF COURSE.
JAMIE, BLESS HER HEART. SHE'S SO GOOD.
ORIGINAL INSURANCE CERTIFICATE BUILT IN 1881, AND THEY HAVE JUST DONE A PHENOMENAL JOB OF RESTORING THE PROPERTY.
I HOPE IT'S ON THE HOME JOKE SOMEDAY.
HERE'S THREE SANBORN MAPS THAT JAMIE HAD PROVIDED.
1912 SHOWS THE TWO STORY DWELLING IN THE BACK.
STILL THERE IN 1947, 1985, IT'S GONE, WHICH YOU'LL SEE IN SOME OF THE PICTURES WHEN THEY BOUGHT THE HOUSE, THEY FOUND A WHOLE BUNCH OF POLAROIDS OF THE PREVIOUS OWNERS, TAKING THOSE ADDITIONS DOWN.
SOME PICTURES OF THE HOUSE, THE STORE PICTURES THAT THEY PROVIDED.
WE CAN SEE THE HOUSE, TWO-STORY, I GUESS IT WAS AN APARTMENT LABELED IN THE BACK THERE.
THERE WAS A GARAGE UNDER THERE.
THAT'S WHERE THE CURB CUT IS STILL EXISTING.
THE BACK OF THE HOUSE WHERE WE PLAN ON ADDING USED TO BE THERE, SO WE'RE GOING TO DO MUCH BETTER THAN THAT.
I THINK THAT'S JUST SOME MORE PICTURES OF WHEN THEY WERE TEARING THOSE OFF AND I THINK NOT TOO LONG AFTER THAT IS WHEN THE APARTMENT IN THE BACK CAME DOWN.
THEN THE LAST EXHIBIT I PUT IN HERE TO GIVE YOU A VISUAL.
NOW WE'VE GOT IT IN A MODEL FORM.
VERY BASIC OF THIS IS WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR PACKAGE.
EXHIBIT E. IT'S THE OVERHEAD VIEW OF THE HOUSE.
THE MAIN HOUSE HERE, AND THIS IS THE ADDITION.
IT'S ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE NOW.
THE DECK AND A LITTLE CUPBOARD PORTION HERE OVER THE NEW ADDITION WE DID ON THERE AND THEN WE CONNECT SEAMLESSLY WITH THE NEW GARAGE.
>> IF I CAN, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU TO WRAP IT UP.
WE HAVE A THREE-MINUTE LIMIT, PLEASE.
[LAUGHTER] I'M EITHER GOING TO GET FASTER BY HER OR YOU BUT [LAUGHTER] SOMEONE'S GOING TO FAST ON ME SO GO AHEAD.
>> JUST A COUPLE OF YOUR VIEWS OF WHAT IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE JUST A BASIC MODEL, MASS MODELS FROM THE ALLEY USE EITHER THE PORCH AND THE ROOF THAT TIES TOGETHER.
JUST BASICALLY SAYING THAT'S OUR MASTER PLAN AND THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE PLAN ALL ALONG.
KEEPING THE BUILDING WHERE IT IS, AND TURNING IT WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR GARAGE DOORS ON THAT SIDE BECAUSE OF THE UTILITY BOXES CURRENTLY THERE.
THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER SOME PHOTOS IN THE BACK, THE VERY LAST OF THIS, WHICH ARE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUST A FEW BLOCKS AWAY, WHICH ARE SOME OF THE INSIGNIFICANT PROPERTIES WITH ALLEY ACCESS, WITH A GARAGE WHICH ARE OPENING ONTO THE STREET AS OPPOSED TO THE ALLEY.
YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE PHOTOS HERE ALL WITHIN THE DISTRICT I BELIEVE AND THEY ALL HAVE ALLEY ACCESS.
COUPLE OF THEM LOOKED LIKE NEW CONSTRUCTION, SOME HAVE BEEN THERE FOR QUITE A WHILE.
THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER AS A FORMER LANDMARK COMMISSIONER AND VICE CHAIR FOR A WHILE.
I APPRECIATE YOUR POSITION AND THE DECISIONS YOU HAVE TO MAKE.
WHAT WE'D LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER ARE THE AT&T BOXES THAT ARE THERE CANNOT BE MOVED.
THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY WE ALREADY HAVE ON 14TH, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT BETTER.
PREVIOUSLY THERE WAS THE DRIVEWAY.
THEN AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD YOU SEE THIS SITUATION IS NOT UNCOMMON.
WITH THAT IN MIND, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.
[00:20:01]
>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
WE DID HAVE ONE CASE WHERE WE EXCHANGED THE EXISTING CURB CUT.
I WOULD DEFINITELY SAY THAT THE UTILITY BOXES PRESENTS AN OBSTACLE THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU CAN WORK AROUND THAT.
THE DRIVEWAY THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, THE NEW DRIVEWAY FOR THE NEW GARAGE, WHAT IS THE TOTAL WIDTH OF THOSE DRIVEWAYS AS COMPARED TO THE TWO THAT ARE THERE? BECAUSE WHAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW IS 16 FEET 14 INCHES.
SORRY. HOW MUCH MORE OF A DRIVEWAY IF WE WERE TO CONSIDER EXCHANGING THAT CURB CUT FOR THE NEW DRIVEWAY, NOT SAYING THAT YOU WOULD WANT THAT, BUT IF THAT'S A POSSIBILITY, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALLOWED IN THE PAST WHERE SOMEONE HAD AN OLD GARAGE AND EXISTING CURB CUT BECAUSE REMEMBER, THIS IS A COMMERCIAL ZONE.
WE CAN'T TAKE AWAY ALL THE CURB SPACE THERE.
BUT YOU ALREADY HAVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY, SO IT SEEMS FAIRLY REASONABLE THAT COMMISSION COULD CONSIDER REMOVING THOSE, RESTORING THE CURB AND GIVING YOU WHAT YOU WANT IN THE NEW BUILD.
THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY THAT'S GOING UNDER THE HOUSE CURRENTLY, HE DOES USE, IT'S SMALL, HE CAN'T GET HIS CARS INTO IT.
YOU GET MOTORCYCLES, GOLF CART, THAT THING.
WITHOUT TALKING TO THE CLIENT, I WOULD SAY THEY WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO KEEP THAT.
NOW THE OTHER ONE THAT IS THERE CURRENTLY THAT GOES NOWHERE IS PROBABLY ABOUT EIGHT FEET WIDE, JUST LIKE THE ONE IS THERE CURRENTLY.
WHAT WE'RE PLANNING TO PUT BACK AND BE A RIBBON DRIVEWAY.
WE HAVE TWO NINE-FOOT DOORS, SO THAT'S 18 FEET PLUS STRUCTURE, 19 FEET PROBABLY.
>> THAT'S TAKING A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF CURB AWAY FOR PARKING IN A COMMERCIAL ZONED AREA.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION, BUT IT MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR STAFF IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO HOLD IT UNTIL I'M NOT SURE.
>> WE ALREADY WENT PAST THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> I'M SORRY. COULD I ASK? WE'RE SAYING IT'S INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE IT'S A PRIMARY STREET, BUT SEALY IS THE PRIMARY STREET FOR THIS HOME AND 14TH IS THE SECONDARY STREET.
I'M JUST WONDERING IF THE EXACT SAME STANDARDS APPLY WHEN IT'S REALLY NOT THEIR PRIMARY STREET.
MAYBE I'M TALKING SEMANTICS. I DON'T KNOW.
IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT IT'S A SIDE STREET FOR THIS HOME.
EVEN THOUGH HE DOES HAVE AN ALLEY, IT'S REALLY LIKE HE DOESN'T HAVE AN ALLEY BECAUSE IT'S OBSTRUCTED BY THE BOXES.
>> I THINK IN MINE IF I WERE TO SEARCH OUT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, THE ISSUES OCCUR BUT OTHER THAN HISTORICALLY, THE GARAGES HAD EARLY ACCESS.
IF YOU GO DOWN THAT STREET, THEY ALL HAVE ALLEY ACCESS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S A SIDE STREET, BUT THERE'S ALSO THE CURB CUT [OVERLAPPING] THAT TAKES PARKING AWAY FROM POTENTIAL [OVERLAPPING] PEOPLE.
>> CAN I ASK REAL QUICK QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? I DON'T THINK IT'S A COMMERCIAL ZONE.
I WOULD LOOK TO TIM TO ANSWER THIS.
I THINK IS 14 POINTS URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> BUT IT HAS A COMMERCIAL ZONE PLOT IN IT SUP MAYBE, BECAUSE WE HAVE AMBULANCES THAT TRAVEL ON THAT.
>> WELL, WHEN YOU SAY PRIMARY STREET, IT'S NOT THAT I THINK THAT JUST THE PRIMARY STREET FOR THIS HOME, BUT 14TH STREET IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE.
THERE WOULDN'T APPLY THE 13TH STREET OR NOT.
>> IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT APPLIES IN THE ENTIRE DISTRICT ON THE SECONDARY STREETS, CORRECT, CATHERINE?
>> BUT IS THIS AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMERCIAL?
>> URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD [OVERLAPPING] WE CONSIDER URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE LIKE A MIXED ZONE, SO YOU CAN DO SOME COMMERCIAL THERE.
>> BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING COMMERCIAL IMMEDIATELY AROUND THE HOUSE.
YOU'RE DOWN TO WINNIE BEFORE THE NEXT THERE'S A CHURCH HERE [OVERLAPPING] WHAT'S THAT?
>> THE BAKERY IS PRETTY CLOSE.
>> THAT'S A FULL ABOUT A BLOCK AND A HALF AWAY WHEREAS THE CHURCH IS ACROSS THE STREET AND THE HOUSE.
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD, COMMERCIAL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT DIFFERENCE IT MAKES, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE IT'S.
>> YEAH [OVERLAPPING] GIVING YOU STRAIGHT.
>> HALF THE TIME CHURCHES ARE PARKING.
ANYBODY THAT GOES TO CHURCH FOR SOMETHING THAT'S PARKED IN FRONT OF HER HOUSE.
>> AGAIN, I WAS JUST SUGGESTING THAT IF YOU DEDUCTED THE EXISTING DRIVEWAYS TO ALLOW FOR THE NEW DRIVEWAY,
[00:25:03]
THAT MIGHT SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF NOT BEING ABLE TO USE ALLEY ACCESS BECAUSE OF THE UTILITY THAT'S THERE.IF HE'S NOT USING THAT GARAGE, MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HE WOULD CONSIDER AND THEN MAYBE THE COMMISSION WOULD CONSIDER, HEY, WE'RE JUST DOING AN EVEN EXCHANGE AS WE HAVE ALLOWED BEFORE.
BUT TAKING THAT MUCH CURB AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD COULD BE PROBLEMATIC FOR PEOPLE.
ANYWAYS, ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS PROJECT? NO. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND ASK FOR A MOTION ON THIS CASE.
BUT SOMEBODY WANT TO BRING FORTH A MOTION.
[LAUGHTER] I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CONSIDER ALLOWING THE NEW DRIVEWAY AND THE NEW CURB CUT, CONSIDERING THAT HE DOES HAVE THESE UTILITIES THAT CAN'T BE MOVED, IN EXCHANGE FOR REMOVING THE EXISTING CURB CUTS AND RESTORING THAT CURB TO ITS ORIGINAL FORMATION SO THAT THE ONLY ACCESS WOULD BE TO THE NEW GARAGE? YES, I UNDERSTAND THAT LIMITS HIS PULLING SOMETHING IN THERE, BUT THERE'S A TRADE-OFF HERE.
WE CAN'T TAKE SO MUCH CURB AWAY ON UNTIL THE NEXT PERSON, THEY CAN'T DO EXACTLY THE SAME.
CURB CUTS SEEMS TO BE THE ISSUE HERE AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DEALT WITH IN THE PAST.
THAT'S MY MOTION, THAT WE ALLOW THE NEW DRIVEWAY AS REQUESTED, TAKE OUT THE TWO OTHER DRIVEWAYS, AND NO DRIVEWAY AT ALL.
IN EXCHANGE I UNDERSTAND IT'S A LITTLE BIT LARGER CURB CUT, SO IT'S NOT AN EVEN EXCHANGE, BUT IT DOES MAKE IT VERY CLEAN CUT.
YOU GET ACCESS TO YOUR NEW GARAGE, AND SOME OF THE CURB HAS BEEN RESTORED FOR PUBLIC PARKING AT THE SAME TIME AND BECAUSE THEN THE CONDITION BE IS STILL NO DRIVEWAY.
THAT'S MY MOTION. MAY HAVE A SECOND.
>> THERE IS ALSO WINDOWS THAT WERE ADDRESSED [INAUDIBLE]
>> YES. I THINK THAT'S PRETTY EASY THOUGH.
I THINK THE BIG CONCERN IS LOOKING AT THREE OR FOUR DRIVEWAYS ALONG THIS PROPERTY AND HOW DO WE GO.
I'M SIMPLY GOING BY CASE HISTORY OF WHAT WE'VE ALLOWED IN THE PAST AND UNDERSTANDING THAT.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES SAY, BUT THIS LEAVES THIS RESIDENT NO CHOICE IF THEY WANT A GARAGE AND THEY WANT TO BUILD PULL CAR INTO THAT GARAGE, THEY HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE BECAUSE UNLESS THERE'S SOME.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THE UTILITY EASEMENTS WOULD BE ABOUT MOVING THESE AND WHERE WOULD THEY MOVE THEM TOO? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NO. ALL IN FAVOR? THANK YOU, SIR. WE GOT YOU SOME OF WHAT YOU WANTED.
ALL RIGHT, LET ME FIND MY PAPERS.
I'M ASKING FOR JUST A SECOND TO GET REORGANIZED HERE.
I'VE GOT PAPERS ALL OVER THE PLACE [LAUGHTER] DO YOU HAVE AGENDA.
HERE IT IS I FOUND, LOOK AT THIS.
GOING FORWARD, WE ARE NOW LOOKING AT CASE 23LC-0111520, ROSENBERG FOR 25TH STREET.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
>> THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE, INCLUDING INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS.
ONE RETURNS THAT ONE IN FAVOR.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO INSTALL 22 SOLAR PANELS ON THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE ROOF.
PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
CONFORMANCE, THE ROOF STYLE IS A HIPPED ROOF.
THE SOLAR PANELS ARE PROPOSED FOR THE STREET-FACING ROOF PLANES.
THE SOLAR PANELS WILL BE AS FAR BACK ON THE ROOF AS POSSIBLE TO MINIMIZE VISIBILITY.
THEY WILL BE MOUNTED FLUSH BELOW THE RIDGE LINE WITH BRACKETS AND MOUNTING RAILS.
THERE'S NO INDICATION OF THE FINISH OF THE SOLAR PANELS, BUT THE DESIGN STANDARDS ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE IN A MATTE BLACK FINISH.
STAFF FINDS THE INSTALLATION OF SOLAR PANELS TO BE IN
[00:30:02]
CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS WITH CONDITIONS.STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
SPECIFIC CONDITION ONE, THE APPLICANT SHALL CONFORM TO THE DESIGN MATERIALS AND PLACEMENT INDICATED IN EXHIBIT A WITH THE FOLLOWING CLARIFICATION.
A, THE SOLAR PANELS FINISHED SHELBY MATTE BLACK.
ITEMS 2 THROUGH 6 ARE STANDARD AND WE HAVE SOME PICTURES.
THIS IS THE DIAGRAM TO THE BACK ONE.
NO PROBLEM, THIS THING IS A LITTLE FUSSY.
THIS IS A DIAGRAM SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE SOLAR PANELS.
IT'S ONLY ON THAT ONE ROOF PLANE, THE SOUTHERN ONE.
THIS IS A PICTURE SHOWING THAT ROOF PLANE.
THEN WE'VE GOT THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, TO THE EAST, AND THEN TO THE WEST.
THEN PROPERTY TO THE WEST HAS SOME SOLAR PANELS YOU CAN BARELY SEE THEM.
THEY'RE ON THEIR ROOF. THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF THE APPLICANT OR PROPERTY OWNER IS PRESENT? NO. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS PROJECT? NO. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND ASK FOR A MOTION, SARAH.
>> I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CASE 23 LC-011 WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE SOLAR PANELS ARE MATTE BLACK.
>> SHANE SECONDS IT. DISCUSSION? NO. I THINK I SAW THIS HOUSE ON THE JCF HOME TOUR A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.
[LAUGHTER] ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES.
WE'RE NOW INTO THIS DISCUSSION ITEM, SO DON'T FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE TO HANG OUT HERE. THANK YOU, THOUGH.
APPRECIATE IT. DISCUSSION ITEM, RECORDED TEXAS HISTORY LANDMARK, DISCUSSION ON NOTIFICATION AND REPORTING EFFORTS.
>> THANK YOU. IN ADDITION TO THE ROLE I HAVE HERE WITH LANDMARK, I'M ALSO THE GALVESTON COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION MARKET CHAIR.
I WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENTS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON OBTAINING RTHL MARKERS FOR THEIR HOMES AND PROPERTIES, AND AS WELL AS OTHER TYPES OF HISTORIC MARKERS.
IT'S A PRETTY BIG DEAL AND I ABSOLUTELY AM VERY PROUD OF THE TEXAS PROGRAM WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE OUR HISTORIC PROPERTIES.
BUT WHEN I JOINED THIS ORGANIZATION, WHICH IS SUCH A WONDERFUL THING THAT OUR CITY HELPS US DO TO PROTECT OUR PROPERTIES, I NOTICED THAT SOMETIMES WE DON'T HAVE COMMUNICATION WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ABOUT THEIR OBLIGATIONS WITH THE RTHL MARKERS.
WE HAD A COUPLE OF APPLICANTS THAT WE MADE EXCEPTIONS AND APPROVED STRUCTURAL CHANGES TO RTHL PROPERTIES, BUT WE DIDN'T MENTION TO THE HOMEOWNER THAT THEY NEEDED TO ALSO GET APPROVAL FROM THE STATE.
I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT OUR OBLIGATION CURRENTLY TO DO THAT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE FOR BOTH US, THE STATE, AND FOR HOMEOWNERS TO HAVE A COORDINATED EFFORT BECAUSE IF WE BY CHANCE APPROVE CHANGING A ROOF LINE IN AN RTHL PROPERTY, AND THE HOMEOWNER CHOOSES NOT TO GO TO THE STATE AND GET THAT APPROVED, THEY MAKE THE CHANGE, THE STATE FINDS OUT, THEY CAN LOSE THAT DESIGNATION AND THAT MARKER CAN BE REMOVED.
WE'RE NOT DOING THEM ANY FAVORS.
WE'RE ACTUALLY COULD BE CAUSING THEM HARM BY LEADING THEM TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE APPROVED A CHANGE THAT WE'RE NOT THE SOLE OWNER OF GRANTING THAT AUTHORITY TO CHANGE.
I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAYBE DO A TEXAS TWO-STEP LIKE YOU DO WITH YOUR INSPECTION STICKER AND YOUR LICENSE REGISTRATION, WHERE IF IT'S AN RTHL PROPERTY WANTING A STRUCTURAL MODIFICATION TO THE EXTERIOR, WE COULD GIVE CITY LANDMARK APPROVAL.
HOWEVER, NOTIFY THE PARTY THEY NEED TO GO TO THE STATE AND THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION WILL REVIEW ALL REQUESTS WITHIN 30 DAYS.
IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S ADDING ALONG THE TIMELINE TO THEIR PROJECT.
THEY SHOULD KNOW OF THIS ANYWAY IF THEY'RE WORKING WITH AN ARCHITECT.
OR MAYBE THE WAY WE DO IT WHEN WE WORK WITH OTHER CITY ORGANIZATIONS WHERE WE SAY WE REFER YOU BACK TO THEM AND THEN YOU GET APPROVAL AND COME BACK TO US AND THEN WE APPROVE IT.
>> APPROVE IT WITH CITY COUNCIL?
>> YES. SOMETHING LITTLE TWO-STEP LIKE THAT.
>> WELL, I PUT TOGETHER A COUPLE OF SLIDES ON RTHLS AND WHAT WE CURRENTLY DO WITH THEM.
WE DO HAVE SOME REPORTING OBLIGATIONS TO THE STATE.
[00:35:03]
HERE'S A LIST OF THE DIFFERENT HISTORIC DESIGNATIONS THAT WE HAVE.IN HISTORIC DISTRICT GALVESTON LANDMARK, REGISTERED TEXAS HISTORIC LANDMARK, I THINK IT'S RECORDED.
>> REGISTERED TEXAS HISTORIC LANDMARK, RTHLS, STATE ANTIQUITIES LANDMARKS, WHICH IS ANOTHER STATE LEVEL DESIGNATION, WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE OF THOSE, GARTEN VEREIN IS ONE, AND THEN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THE TOP TWO IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT ARE REGULATED BY THE CITY AND SO OR GALVESTON LANDMARKS.
THE RTHLS IN THE STATE ANTIQUITIES LANDMARKS ARE REGULATED BY THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION, AND THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES ARE NOT REGULATED, SO THOSE DON'T COME UNDER THE PURVIEW OF EITHER THE CITY OR THE THC.
RTHLS, AS COMMISSIONER BAKER WAS TELLING US, WAS A STATE-LEVEL DESIGNATION.
AS OF TODAY, THERE ARE OVER 3,000 RTHLS STATEWIDE.
IT'S ADMINISTERED BY THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
THEY REVIEW AUTHORITY ABOUT EXTERIOR CHANGES, ADDITIONS, RELOCATIONS, AND DEMOLITION.
NEXT SLIDE. WE HAVE 100 RTHLS, WHICH IS A GOOD NUMBER.
IN THE FIRST-CLASS IN 1962, THERE WERE 12 DESIGNATED, INCLUDING THE CRADLE, WHICH IS THE BUILDING AT THE TOP.
THE LATEST WERE DESIGNATED IN 2021, THAT'S THE CAELIAN MARY HUTCHINS HOME, WHICH IS ON THE BOTTOM, AND IS ALSO A GALVESTON LANDMARK, AND THE CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL RABBI COHEN TEMPLE ON AVENUE.
OUR PROGRAM HERE AT THE CITY IS A CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT, IT'S CALLED A CLG.
THAT'S A PROGRAM THAT'S ADMINISTERED BY THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION, AND IT'S TO ENSURE THAT HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS ADHERE TO NATIONAL STANDARDS.
ONE OF OUR REQUIREMENTS AS A CLG IS TO MONITOR AND REPORT ACTIONS AFFECTING COUNTY COURTHOUSES, RTHLS, SALS AND NATIONAL REGISTER PROPERTIES TO THE THC.
WE DO THAT IN THE FORM OF MONTHLY REPORTS THAT WE SEND TO THE THC ON PERMITS RECENTLY PULLED IN THE LAST 30 DAYS FOR BOTH RTHLS AND NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES PROPERTIES.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I DID JUST THIS MORNING.
WE DO IT ON THE FIRST OF THE MONTH.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE REPORT THAT WAS SENT TODAY, SO IT LISTS THE ADDRESS, WHAT THE HISTORIC NAME OF IT IS, THE RTHL NAME, AND A DESCRIPTION OF THE WORK THAT WAS PULLED.
WE DO HAVE COMMUNICATION WITH THE THC ON THIS MONTHLY BASIS.
WE ALSO SUBMIT YOUR MINUTES, KARINA SUBMITS THOSE TO THE THC AFTER EVERY MEETING SO THAT THEY KNOW THAT WE'RE HAVING OUR MEETINGS AS WE'RE SUPPOSED TO.
WE ALSO WILL, AS A COURTESY, TELL PROPERTY OWNERS THAT THEY NEED TO DO THE RTHL, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE REQUIRE OF THEM.
>> I WASN'T AWARE THAT WE WERE LETTING THEM KNOW ABOUT THE PROPERTY NOTICE, THAT WE WERE NOTIFYING THAT THEY HAD AN OBLIGATION.
FOR INSTANCE, THAT ONE PROPERTY OWNER, WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THEY HAD AN RTHL.
THEY SAID, "THERE'S SOMETHING WITH A STATE OF TEXAS STAR ON IT ON OUR PORCH, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS." THAT REALLY WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING IS WHAT I THINK WE NEED, BUT I WASN'T AWARE IT WAS HAPPENING OR MAYBE IT WASN'T HAPPENING AS VISIBLY AS MAYBE I THOUGHT IS NECESSARY.
>> SURE. I DON'T THINK THE COMMISSION HAS BEEN INFORMED THAT WE DO THESE REPORTS.
WE DO THESE MONTHLY REPORTS TO THE TEXAS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE REPORTS ARE AFTER THE FACT.
IF THE HOMEOWNER RECEIVES OUR STAMP OF APPROVAL AND GOES FORTH AND IMMEDIATELY PULLS THEIR PERMANENT AND STARTS THE WORK, IT'S TOO LATE.
BUT IF WE AT THE TIME WERE GIVING THEM OUR APPROVAL, LET THEM KNOW YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO GO TO THC, THEN I FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT.
BUT I WAS AFRAID WE WERE NOT LETTING THE HOMEOWNER KNOW IN A TIMELY BASIS WHAT ACTION THEY'RE REQUIRED TO TAKE.
>> CATHERINE, HOW DOES THC'S GUIDELINES COMPARE TO OUR OWN THAT WE'RE APPROVING OR NOT APPROVING? WOULD THEY SUPPORT THINGS THAT WE APPROVE BASED ON HOW OUR GUIDELINES ARE WRITTEN? BECAUSE VERY RARELY DO WE ALLOW ANY CHANGES TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
IT HAS TO BE FAIRLY DIRE, LIKE THE DOORS FALLING OFF.
>> WELL, THE ONE ON AVENUE L IS THE ONE THAT JUST FIRED ME UP.
>> 24TH AND L. THAT'S THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
>> THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT I'VE SEEN, BUT IS SO VISIBLE, AND IT'S ALSO A TEXAS HISTORIC LANDMARK.
>> BUT I THINK WE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT IN CERTAIN CASES, SOMEONE SHOULDN'T BE PROHIBITED OR PENALIZED, IF YOU WILL, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CORNER LOT.
I THINK WE HAVE PRETTY HARD AND FAST RULES ABOUT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THAT THERE BE
[00:40:04]
NO CHANGES TO THE FRONT OF THAT HOUSE UNLESS THERE'S SOME EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE TO THAT.BUT WE HAVE ALLOWED OTHER PEOPLE TO CHANGES ON THE SIDES.
I GET YOU SAY, IT'S A GRAY AREA THAT'S NOT WELL DEFINED.
>> JUST TO ANSWER THE CHAIRPERSON'S QUESTION, THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION WOULD USE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REVIEW, AND THOSE ARE THE STANDARDS UPON WHICH OUR STANDARDS ARE BASED.
OURS ARE MUCH MORE DETAILED AND TAILORED TO GALVESTON [OVERLAPPING].
>> LIKELY THEY WOULD BE FINE WITH IT.
>> I WOULD THINK SO. IN MY ALMOST 18 YEARS, I'VE NEVER SEEN A CONFLICT WHERE WE'VE APPROVED ONE THING AND THE THC HAS APPROVED SOMETHING ELSE.
>> I WONDER IF IT'S AS SIMPLE AS ASKING STAFF, AND SOMETIMES THEY MAY NOT KNOW UNTIL THE PHOTOGRAPHS COME IN AND GO, BY THE WAY, THERE'S ONE OF THOSE SIGNS THERE.
IF IT'S JUST AS SIMPLE AS ASKING STAFF TO NOTIFY THE HOMEOWNER BY THE WAY, YOU NEED TO RECORD THIS WIDTH OR THERE COULD BE CONSEQUENCES AND THAT'S AS MUCH AS WE'RE OWED TO, IT DOESN'T REALLY NEED TO COME TO US AT ALL.
>> WE DO THAT. WE KEEP IT IN OUR MAPPING SYSTEM.
IT'S INFORMATION THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR ME AND FOR DANIEL TO SEE AND WE'LL PASS THAT ONTO THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
>> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO US.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT SUBJECT.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO ADD TO THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION ON THE NEXT ITEM, OUR NEXT MEETING? NO. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.