GOOD AFTERNOON. I WANT TO WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
[Landmark Commission on March 4, 2024.]
[00:00:04]
TODAY IS MONDAY, MARCH 4TH, AND THE TIME BEING 4:00.OKAY. IS EVERYONE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES? DO YOU SEE ANY CHANGES? THAT NEED TO BE MADE TO THEM.
OKAY. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO GO ON CATHERINE? DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? PUBLIC COMMENT HAS BEEN RECEIVED.
OKAY, WE DO HAVE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE GUESTS IN THE AUDIENCE.
OR YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME UP AND TALK BEFORE WE GET STARTED ON OUR REGULAR MEETING.
SO, IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WANTS TO TALK ABOUT THE DISCUSSION ITEM AT THE END OF THIS, OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT TILL THE END OF THE MEETING? OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST CASE THE NEW BUSINESS AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEARINGS.
THIS IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THAT'S 112 TREMONT STREET OR 23RD.
ALRIGHTY. SO YEAH, AS STATED, THIS IS A 112 23RD STREET.
THERE WERE FIVE PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, AND NONE OF THOSE WERE RETURNED.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ADD 25 INCH HIGH OR TWO FEET, ONE-INCH-HIGH CMU WALLS BETWEEN THE EXISTING COLUMNS FACING HARBORSIDE AND AT EACH END OF THE COLONNADE THERE WHICH WOULD BE EAST AND WEST, RESPECTIVELY.
THE WALL WILL BE GROUTED AND ANCHORED IN PLACE.
PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND THE STAFF REPORT.
STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST GENERALLY CONFORMS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
THE DESIGN STANDARDS DO NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THIS SORT OF A PROPOSAL.
THE WALLS ARE RELATIVELY LOW AND OBTRUSIVE AND BLEND IN WITH THE OVERALL FACADE.
STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THE WALLS BE CONSTRUCTED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO BE EASILY REVERSIBLE IN THE FUTURE, IF SOMEONE SHOULD WANT TO DO THAT AND REMOVE WITHOUT DAMAGING THE HISTORIC MATERIALS. WHILE STILL SERVING THE FUNCTION, OF COURSE.
SO, THIS IS A SUBJECT PROPERTY LOOKING GENERALLY SOUTHWEST ACROSS HARBORSIDE.
YOU CAN SEE THAT COLONNADE THERE THAT FACES MOSTLY NORTH, BUT THEN THERE'S AN ARCH ON EITHER END.
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND HERE WE HAVE THE ARCHITECT'S DRAWINGS SEWING WHERE THE COLONNADE SITS IN RELATION TO HARBORSIDE DRIVE AND THE MAIN MASS OF THE STRUCTURE. ALSO, PHOTOS LOOKING EAST ALONG THE COLONNADE AND THEN ON THE RIGHT OF WAY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT.
AND OF COURSE, THE ARCHITECT'S DRAWINGS SHOWING HOW THIS WALL WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED.
AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. OKAY. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF MR. WATSON WAS HERE, IF HE COULD STEP UP, STATE HIS NAME AND SIGN IN, PLEASE.
I'M THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT.
AND THE COMMENTS THAT THE CITY CAME BACK WITH ARE THE EXACT SAME COMMENTS THAT THC SUPPLIED US WITH.
IT WOULD HAVE HAD DOORS, WINDOWS OR WALL INFILL.
[00:05:10]
OF HARBORSIDE DRIVE.THE REASON WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS BREAKWATER.
AS MOST OF YOU PROBABLY ARE AWARE, THE HARBORSIDE DRIVE BECOMES A RIVER AT EVEN A SLIGHT RAIN, AND WITH THE LARGE TRAFFIC TRUCKS BUSSES THAT GO ALONG THERE, THEY CREATE A HUGE WAKE.
THAT WAKE BLOWS AGAINST THE NEW WALL, WHICH IS ONLY A METAL STUD WALL, AND SITTING ON THE CONCRETE AND WITH THE IMPACT OF THAT WATER, IT BLOWS IT UNDER THE WALL AND INTO THE BUILDING.
SO ANY QUESTIONS OF ME? NO, I IT'S A PROTECTIVE MEASURE, OBVIOUSLY.
I WISH WE HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE IDEA OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
BUT THERE REALLY ISN'T AN EXAMPLE OF IT.
IS IT JUST GOING TO BE LIKE TWO COURSES OF BRICK OR SOMETHING? THREE COURSES OF CONCRETE BLOCK, OKAY, THAT ARE PLASTERED.
IT'LL MATCH, BUT IT'LL BE SET BACK FROM THE MAIN COLUMNS THAT ARE THERE NOW TO, TO OFFSET IT.
AND BOTH THE CITY AND THC HAVE REQUESTED THAT WE PAINTED A DARKER COLOR SO THAT IT CONTRASTS WITH THE EXISTING WHITE COLOR OF THE COLUMNS THAT ARE THERE.
ABSOLUTELY. IT MIGHT BE OBVIOUS FROM [INAUDIBLE].
NO, THE ENDS ARE STILL STAYING OPEN.
SO, YOU WOULD WALK ALONG UNDER THE WALKWAY? WELL, BASICALLY JUST WHERE THIS, NOT THE ONE ON THE RIGHT, THE PHOTO ON THE RIGHT, BUT THE ONE ON THE LEFT.
YES. HOW WIDE IS THAT LITTLE BRICK EASEMENT BETWEEN THOSE COLUMNS AND THE CURB? I MEAN, YOU PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO DISCOURAGE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC THERE ANYWAY, BECAUSE YOU'RE LITERALLY A FOOT OR SO OFF HARBORSIDE.
THAT HERRINGBONE BRICK PAVING.
CORRECT. IT'S VERY UNCOMFORTABLE TO WALK ALONG THERE WHEN YOU'VE GOT HEAVY.
THE BIG TRUCKS AND CARS GOING ALONG.
SURE, SURE. AND SO THAT'S WHY THE WIDER.
REALLY, IT WOULD DIRECT MORE SAFER TRAFFIC.
IT'S MUCH SAFER AS WELL AS THE WATER.
THEY ALSO DID IT THERE AT STUTTGART.
BUT STUTTGART HAS TAKEN AND CLOSED IT BACK IN WITH THOSE GATES AND THEY USE THAT FOR STORAGE.
I THINK THEY JUST CAME TO US A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO WITH THAT, ACTUALLY.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY.
IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CASE? NO. OKAY.
I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CASE 24LC-003 WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
DISCUSSION. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ADD TO THIS DISCUSSION? NO. OKAY.
ALL IN FAVOR? IT'S UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU.
OKAY, MOVING ON TO CASE 24LC-004 2301 STRAND AVENUE B.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
SEVEN NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RETURNED.
THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED HISTORIC EVIDENCE THAT THE BUILDING PREVIOUSLY HAD A CANOPY.
PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT CONFORMANCE.
STAFF FINDS THE CANOPY TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THIS DESIGN.
STANDARDS. SANBORN MAPS INDICATE THAT THE BUILDING ORIGINALLY HAD A CANOPY.
THE CANOPY ALONG STRAND AND 23RD STREET IS SHOWN ON THE 1885, 1889, 1899, AND 1912 SANBORN MAPS.
[00:10:02]
IT WAS REMOVED BY BY THE PUBLICATION OF THE 1947 MAPS, WHICH SHOW NO CANOPY PRESENT.THE APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL DEPICTS A SIMPLE FLAT CANOPY WHICH WILL SERVE AS A BALCONY WITH SIMPLE HANDRAIL DESIGN AND CANOPY COLUMNS WHICH DO NOT DETRACT FROM OR BLOCK THE FACADE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH SPECIFIC CONDITION ONE.
AND THEN WE HAVE I THINK THIS IS THE FIRST SANBORN, THE 1885 SANBORN.
IT'S SHOWN THAT YELLOW THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINES IS INDICATING CANOPIES.
AND THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE BUILDING WITH THE CANOPY IN PLACE.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE PROPERTIES TO THE EAST, WEST AND SOUTH.
AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE IS THE COLUMNS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ON THIS.
ARE THEY? PRETTY MUCH AS WE CAN TELL, SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS BUILT ORIGINALLY.
THAT KIND OF CONSTRUCTION WITH SINGLE COLUMN LIKE THAT? I THINK. SO, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE DRAWING, KARINA.
SO, IT'S JUST A SIMPLE SO SIMPLE PIPE SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL.
WE'RE NOT REQUIRE THEM TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL.
WE DON'T NECESSARILY BECAUSE WE WANT IT TO BE CLEAR THAT IT'S A MODERN FEATURE.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY, I THIS TIME I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF MR. GERTNER OR IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE? MR. GERTNER SENT A NOTE THAT HE WASN'T GOING TO BE ABLE TO ATTEND THIS TODAY.
OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE? NO. OKAY.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE.
24LC-004. WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE'VE GOT A SECOND DISCUSSION.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ADD TO THIS? NO, I LIKE IT.
BUT AGAIN, I ALSO APPRECIATE HOW INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE THESE BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN ARE TO DO SO THAT WE HAVE SOMEONE COMING UP AT ALL WANTING TO RESTORE THAT CANOPY IS JUST SUCH A WIN-WIN.
YEAH. ANYBODY SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THE TREES.
ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? NO. OKAY.
PEOPLE HAVE REACHED OUT TO US AS WE'RE SEEING IT BECOME MORE AND MORE RELEVANT AROUND.
IT'S KIND OF A FAD, THESE THINGS, I THINK.
AND SO THEY KIND OF JUST WANT US TO, TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO TAKE UP IN A WORKSHOP AND CONSIDER FOR SOMETHING IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
BUT BEFORE WE GET TO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME UP, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP, MR. BROWN, AND SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? AND I THINK, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, DOES SOMEONE TELL ME YOU WERE THE FIRST LANDMARK, COMMISSIONER? THAT'S RIGHT. I'LL GET TO THAT IN A MINUTE.
WAS I BORN THEN? I'M JUST KIDDING. OKAY.
YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS GOING TO LIE ABOUT MY AGE.
I'VE LIVED AT 1027 SEALY IN THE EAST END HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR WELL OVER 20 YEARS.
[00:15:01]
AND CARNEY'S POINT ABOUT 24 YEARS AGO.I SAT WHERE YOU SIT NOW AS THE CHAIR OF THE VERY FIRST LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO, I HAVE A VERY DEEP APPRECIATION OF WHAT YOU ALL DO.
AND I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS DISCUSSION.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, THE USE OF THE ARTIFICIAL TURF AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS WITHIN A BLOCK OF MY HOUSE ON IN THE EAST END HISTORIC DISTRICT, THERE ARE THREE HOUSES THAT HAVE THIS PLASTIC GRASS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IN THE FRONT YARD, OR BOTH, AND YOU MIGHT NOT NOTICE IT DRIVING DOWN SEALEY AT ABOUT 20 TO 25 MILES AN HOUR.
AND I THOUGHT, IS THIS THE REACTION WE WANT FROM PEOPLE WALKING AROUND OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS? AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DON'T REGULATE LANDSCAPE PLANT MATERIAL IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND FOR A GOOD REASON.
IT'S KIND OF IN A CATEGORY OF ITS OWN.
IT DOESN'T FLOWER OR CHANGE COLORS WITH THE SEASONS.
SO, I BROUGHT IT TO CATHERINE'S AND CONNIE'S ATTENTION, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS WHERE ANY DECISION OF REGULATING PLASTIC GRASS IN THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY OVER THE FRONT YARD, VISIBLE FROM THE CITY RIGHT OF WAY, WILL BE DETERMINED.
THANK YOU, CONNIE, AND THANK YOU, LANDMARK COMMISSION, FOR TAKING THE TIME TO REVIEW THIS.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS TOPIC? OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THIS UP WITH A COMMISSION TO SEE WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT.
THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE ON THE RIGHT OF WAY, SOME THAT ARE IN THE YARDS.
AGAIN, THIS IS NOTHING WE CAN MAKE A DECISION ON TODAY.
ONLY DO WE WANT TO MAKE THE DECISION TO TAKE IT UP.
DO WE HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, TO TAKE IT UP IN A WORKSHOP AND SEE WHAT WE THINK? I CAN KIND OF SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE ON THIS.
MY CONCERN IS WHAT WE SEE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND ONLY BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE WOULD USE COMMON SENSE THAT WHEN IT BECOMES WORN DOWN OR FADED OR THREADBARE, THEY REMOVE IT.
BUT AS WE KNOW IT'S NOT, THERE'S NOT EVERYONE IS GOING TO FEEL THE WAY WE DO.
SO, I FEEL LIKE I STRUGGLE TO TELL PROPERTY OWNERS WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO ON THE PHYSICAL BOUNDARIES OF THEIR PROPERTY BEHIND THE FENCE, RIGHT? THAT'S THEIR PROPERTY.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MAY NOT BE AS WELL TAKEN CARE OF AS WHAT'S ON YOUR OWN PROPERTY.
WHEN PEOPLE WALK ON THEIR DOGS AND YOU CAN IMAGINE WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE AFTER A WHILE, BUT THAT WOULD REALLY BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE TAKEN UP WITH THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, NOT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
ALL WE CAN SAY IS, I THINK ALL WE CAN PRETTY MUCH REGULATE IS EITHER IN THE FRONT YARD ONLY OR BEYOND THE FRONT LOT LINE OF THE HOUSE, MEANING YOU KNOW WHERE YOU COULD WHERE YOU COULD NATURALLY PUT A FENCE.
THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY THOUGHT.
SO I'M GOING TO. PUT MY MICROPHONE DOWN.
SEE WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE TO SAY.
I. I AGREED WITH THE MEMORANDUM, I THINK IT'D BE VERY HARD TO ENFORCE IT.
BUT IT HAPPENS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
AND I LIKE THE COMPARISON TO PAINT COLOR.
THERE ARE HOUSES THAT ARE PAINTED IN WAYS THAT I GO TO, BUT.
AND I FEEL THE SAME WAY ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING.
OKAY. AND I'LL JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD, NANCY REFERRED TO THE MEMO.
SO, THIS WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKETS TODAY WHEN YOU GOT TO YOUR DESK.
SO, IT'S A MEMO FROM MYSELF ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF REGULATING ARTIFICIAL TURF.
[00:20:05]
SO, I REACHED OUT TO THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS FOR INPUT.IF ARTIFICIAL TURF IS DISALLOWED, WHAT ABOUT XERISCAPING HARDSCAPING OR SWEPT CLEAN DIRT YARDS? IF ONE TYPE OF LANDSCAPING IS CALLED OUT FOR REGULATION, THEN WHAT'S NEXT? AND THEN, MUCH LIKE PAINT COLOR, LANDSCAPING IS A PERSONAL CHOICE THAT DOESN'T HARM THE STRUCTURES AND CAN BE EASILY CHANGED IN THE FUTURE.
SO, WE DON'T RECOMMEND THE REGULATION OF ARTIFICIAL TURF FOR THOSE REASONS.
WELL, AND AGAIN, WE ALSO HAVE.
I DON'T WANT TO BRING UP THAT THAT.
I'D LIKE TO ADD MY $0.02, PLEASE.
AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID, BUT I DO HAVE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.
WE DID INSTALL ARTIFICIAL TURF IN OUR BACKYARD AROUND THE POOL BECAUSE WE COULDN'T KEEP A YARD, COULDN'T KEEP GRASS GROWING, AND YOU HAVE DIRT BLOWING INTO THE POOL AND WHATNOT.
IT'S TOO GREEN, NOT NATURAL, WHATEVER.
SO EVEN WITHIN HOUSEHOLDS, WE CAN'T AGREE.
THANK YOU. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ADD? ALL I CAN SAY IS GO, FRANK, I DO NOT I DO NOT CARE FOR ARTIFICIAL TURF.
IT IT HAS NO PLACE IN THE AREAS WHERE WE LIVE IN.
I'M AGAINST IT BEING IN THE FRONT.
YES. AND I'M AGAINST IT BEING ON THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY.
YES. IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT INSIDE YOUR OWN FENCE.
BUT ONCE AGAIN, LIKE CATHERINE SAID, IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO ENFORCE ALL OF THAT.
YOU'D ALMOST NEED ONE PERSON DRIVING AROUND ALL THE TIME.
WELL, WE COULD WORKSHOP IT A LITTLE FURTHER IF WE THOUGHT IF THERE'S A MAJORITY THAT FEELS LIKE THIS WAY OR THAT WAY, WE'LL GO. WE'LL FIGURE OUT THEN.
BUT YOU COULD WORKSHOP IT, GRANDFATHER.
BUT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT IN A WORKSHOP WITH OUR FAVORITE CITY ATTORNEY WITH US.
OKAY. THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO ENFORCE MOWING REGULATIONS.
I JUST DON'T SEE THIS AS A PRACTICAL THING THAT WE CAN ENFORCE, EVEN IF WE ALL FELT THE SAME WAY.
IT'S I DON'T THINK IT'S THE BEST USE OF OUR RESOURCES.
WELL, BUT YET THIS WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE CODE ENFORCEMENT IT WOULD BE INTO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES WOULD BE ENTERED IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT WE DON'T ALLOW.
AND YOU COULD SAY AS A WHOLE, WE WOULD WORKSHOP THIS ARTIFICIAL LANDSCAPING AS A WHOLE.
BEYOND THAT, YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT.
SO, IF I MAY PLEASE, I DID A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON THIS FOR THIS MEETING.
AND SO JUST TO POINT OUT TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
I WAS ABLE TO FIND THAT THERE REALLY IS ONLY ONE CITY, WHICH IS ONE STATE, I SHOULD SAY CALIFORNIA.
THAT KIND OF REGULATES THIS ARTIFICIAL TURF ISSUE.
FOR THEM, IT'S REALLY A DROUGHT TOLERANCE TYPE OF INITIATIVE.
AND IN FACT, IT IS PROMOTED AS A DROUGHT TOLERANCE INITIATIVE.
AND THEY HAVE REGULATIONS ALONG THOSE LINES.
WHEN I RESEARCHED WHAT'S HAPPENING IN TEXAS THE INTERESTING THING IS THE TEXAS, OR THE STATE PROPERTY CODE REGULATES HOAS.
THOSE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT TYPE OF SITUATIONS, AND THE REGULATIONS SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS CANNOT PROHIBIT OR IMPLEMENT USING DROUGHT RESISTANT LANDSCAPING OR WATER CONSERVING NATURAL TURF.
[00:25:03]
AND THAT'S JUST FOR HOAS.AND SO, IF THE STATE HAS ALREADY FALLEN ON THAT, YOU CANNOT PROHIBIT IT, THEN THAT'S AN HOA.
THAT'S THOSE ARE WE HAVE NO HOA.
WE HAVE NO ZONING AND WE DO NOT ENFORCE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS.
BUT YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF THE STATE IS TELLING EACH OF US AND ORGANIZATIONS OF THAT ILK, THAT YOU CAN'T PROHIBIT THIS TYPE OF MEDIA MEDIUM FOR YOUR LANDSCAPING.
THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE WITH A CITY TRYING TO DO IT.
NOW I WILL SAY I WILL SAY THAT IT DOESN'T.
IT PROHIBITS SOMEBODY FROM PROHIBITING THAT TYPE OF LANDSCAPING, BUT IT DOES ALLOW REGULATIONS FOR TYPE OF TURF, FOR AREA OF TURF AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND MAINTENANCE OF TURF WITHIN THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AREA, THE OWNER'S AREA.
SO THAT'S ONE THING TO CONSIDER.
IF THIS COMMISSION, IF THIS BODY REALLY WANTS TO TRY AND PURSUE THIS, THEN THEY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHAT ARE THE REALLY THE FUNDAMENTAL REASONS WHY IT'S NECESSARY. AND ESTHETICS IS GENERALLY NOT IT.
OKAY. AGAIN, CALIFORNIA'S INITIATIVE IS BECAUSE IT'S LITERALLY SEEKING DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPES.
ZERO. HOW DO YOU CALL IT X ZERO, WHICH I HAD TO LOOK UP.
BUT THIS IS A LITTLE ASK YOU THIS FOR YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS.
I'M JUST GOING TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE.
WE HAVE IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE A PLASTIC FENCE.
YOU CAN ONLY HAVE A NATURAL ONE.
SO HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT REALLY THAN PLASTIC GRASS.
NOW I RECALL YEARS AGO THAT WE ACTUALLY HAD A FENCE ISSUE WHERE THE ISSUE WAS THE FENCE ITSELF WAS HISTORIC, BUT THE HOUSE WAS NOT, IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER THAT.
AND SO, AND THE APPLICANT SAID REMOVED THAT FENCING.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS, I THINK YOU'RE ON.
HOW LONG AGO WAS THAT? OH, GOD, THIS HAS BEEN YEARS AGO.
I MEAN, BUT I THINK THE ISSUE WAS THEY WEREN'T AWARE THAT THEY WERE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RIGHT. BUT THE HOUSE ITSELF WASN'T HISTORIC AS IT HAD BEEN DESTROYED BY FIRE.
WE BUILT WHATEVER, BUT THE FENCE ITSELF WAS.
AND SO, THEY ACTUALLY GOT A VIOLATION FROM THE CITY BECAUSE THEY TORE THE FENCE DOWN.
I DON'T KNOW IF ARTIFICIAL TURF CAN BE A HISTORIC FEATURE OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S FAIR. THE OTHER THING ABOUT THIS, AND NO ONE HAS SAID A WORD ABOUT THIS.
PEOPLE TRY AND HELP OUT THE BIRDS AND THE INSECTS THAT COME THROUGH.
DON'T LET IT GROW TOO HIGH THOUGH, RIGHT? BUT THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT A HISTORIC PRESERVATION REASON.
SO, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION COULD SAY CHALLENGE.
WHAT IF I WANTED TO PUT VINYL SIDING ON MY GRASS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT? SO JUST HAVING FUN.
OKAY, WELL, I'M JUST I WANT TO GET TO A POINT IS THAT THE IF THE MAJORITY OF US FEEL STRONGLY THAT SOMETHING SHOULD BE CONSIDERED MORE THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE, THEN WE WOULD TAKE IT TO A WORKSHOP.
IN THE BACKYARD. IN THE BACKYARD.
BUT SHE DIDN'T WANT IT IN THE FRONT YARD, SO SHE.
SO. I FEEL STRONGLY WE SHOULD NOT PURSUE THIS.
I THINK THAT WE'RE GETTING TOO FAR INTO THE CARE, AND I AGREE.
I LIKE THAT TOO FAR INTO THE CATHERINE WORLD.
I DEFINITELY DON'T THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD REGULATE.
I JUST HAD FUN WITH IT, I DON'T THINK.
OKAY. MAY I MAKE ONE? NO, I'M A LAME DUCK.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO. I KNOW MY OPINION.
GO FOR IT, DAVID. JUST JUMP OUT THERE.
I HAVE A REAL HARD TIME SEEING COUNCIL GETTING BEHIND REGULATING THIS.
[00:30:01]
UNLESS YOU'RE ARTIFICIAL TURFS MORE THAN NINE INCHES TALL.YOU KNOW, WE JUST WENT THROUGH MORE THAN A YEAR OF WRESTLING WITH THE WILDFLOWER ORDINANCE.
I HAVE A TOUGH TIME SEEING THE CITY, THE CITY COUNCIL GETTING BEHIND THIS.
WELL, AT THIS POINT, WHAT I HAVE IS FOUR VOTES FROM THIS COMMISSION THAT DO NOT WANT TO TAKE THIS ISSUE UP, AND THAT IS THE OVERRIDING MAJORITY.
I DON'T EVEN NEED TO PUT MYSELF IN IT BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY 4 TO 2.
SO, ON THAT, I WOULD JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE TYPE OF IS THIS DISCUSSION THAT CAN BE HAD.
AND I THINK THAT'S A VALUABLE ISSUE BECAUSE, OH, WE DON'T WANT NINE INCH TALL.
RIGHT. SO THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WE CAN EXPLORE.
I WOULD SAY THIS, I WOULD SAY THIS, PLEASE DON'T BE DISCOURAGED BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A NEW TOPIC.
IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'VE SEVEN YEARS, THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS EVER COME UP, THIS HAS EVER COME UP.
BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND WHAT LEGAL IS SAYING IS THAT WE HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS IN TEXAS.
TEXAS IS A PROPERTY RIGHTS STATE, AND IT WOULD NOT BE TOO FARFETCHED FOR SOME OF THESE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SPENT A FORTUNE ON THIS STUFF TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M GOING TO CHALLENGE YOU IN COURT, AND WE KNOW WE'LL LOSE THAT ARGUMENT.
SO, IS THERE MODERATION? ARE THERE RECOMMENDATIONS? IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GET TOGETHER AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT THIS IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, BUT WE COULD RECOMMEND THAT THIS WOULD BE THE TYPE OR COLOR OR SOMETHING, AS SHE SUGGESTED.
THERE'S ONE THAT ACTUALLY HAS LITTLE GRASS AND IT'S IN YOUR PROPERTY.
RIGHT. SO THAT WE JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION JUST BEING NEIGHBORLY HERE.
BUT IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT BEING IN THE RIGHT OF WAY? THAT'S CITY PROPERTY.
THE RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE CURB.
OKAY. THAT'S A THAT'S THAT IS NOT CITY PROPERTY.
YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY, THE MAINTENANCE, THE CURB, THE SIDEWALK.
THAT'S THE PROPERTY. WE DON'T ALLOW PLUMBING ON IT, BUT THAT'S, LET'S CLARIFY THAT A LITTLE BIT.
YEAH. SO, A CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY.
AND FOLKS THAT HAVE A RIGHT OF WAY ADJACENT TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE, THE PERSONS THAT HAVE PROPERTY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY AGAINST THEIR PROPERTY, THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THAT PROPERTY.
SO IS IT PART OF YOUR DEED WITH THE NO, NO DEEDS, BUT AND ITS STATE LAW THAT THE PERSON WHO'S ADJACENT TO THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THAT.
WELL, THE SIDEWALK ALL THE WAY UP TO THE CURB, THE PROPERTY, ALL THAT.
AND, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING THEIR HEADS AROUND THAT SOMETIMES AS TO, HEY, IF I DON'T OWN IT, SO TO SPEAK, WHY DO I HAVE TO MAINTAIN IT? BUT THAT HAS BEEN I HATE TO USE THAT HAS BEEN THROUGH THE COURTS YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS AGO, AND ITS STATE LAW, BUT THERE'S NO REPERCUSSIONS IF YOU DON'T MAINTAIN IT.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING COMING UP.
AND YOU SEE PEOPLE FALLING ALMOST DAILY, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THAT.
NO, IF IT'S NOT MY HOUSE, IF IT'S A HOUSE ON MY BLOCK THAT THIS IS HAPPENING, TOO.
YEAH, THAT'S A CITY MARSHAL ISSUE.
AND PEOPLE GET CITED FOR THE CONDITION OF THEIR SIDEWALKS.
OKAY. BUT WHAT I'LL SAY IS THAT WE CAN PUT THIS ON OUR LIST.
WE HAVE A RUNNING LIST OF TOPICS TO BE DISCUSSED WHEN WE REDO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
DESIGN STANDARDS WERE ADOPTED IN 2012, SO WE'RE WELL OVERDUE FOR A REVIEW OF THEM.
SO, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, PUT IT ON THE LIST AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ADDRESS IT.
YES. I MEAN, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE PLAN TO DO IN THE NEXT YEAR.
IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT'S FUNDED, BUT WE COULD PUT IT ON OUR LIST.
I'VE SEEN IT DONE REALLY WELL AND I'VE SEEN IT DONE POORLY.
IT COULD BE UNDER CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUT I THINK THAT THERE MAY BE A TIME ON THE FUTURE WHERE WE HAVE TO SAY, OKAY, THIS IS GETTING OUT OF HAND BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, ALL THESE MILLENNIALS ARE SO LAZY, THEY DON'T WANT TO MOW THE GRASS.
THEY JUST WANT TO PUT THIS STUFF DOWN.
US BOOMERS KNOW WE'RE FERTILIZING AND WE'RE RUNNING THE LOAD.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. BROWN, SO MUCH FOR COMING UP AND BRINGING THIS TO US.
IS THERE ANYBODY THAT HAS ANYTHING THEY WANT TO PUT ON THE DISCUSSION FOR NEXT TIME? MY RETIREMENT PLANS.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.