Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

GOOD AFTERNOON. I WANT TO WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

[Landmark Commission on March 18, 2024.]

[00:00:05]

TODAY IS MONDAY, MARCH 18TH, AND THE TIME IS 4:00.

WE'LL START WITH ROLL CALL.

DANIEL, DO YOU MIND DOING THE ROLL CALL? I WILL TRY.

LET'S SEE HERE. COMMISSIONER ALBERSTADT.

COMMISSIONER BAKER COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS.

VICE CHAIRPERSON CLICK.

PRESENT. COMMISSIONER FITZ.

PRESENT. COMMISSIONER FLINT-BUDDE PRESENT.

COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, I BELIEVE, IS NOT HERE.

CHAIRPERSON PATTERSON PRESENT.

COMMISSIONER STETZEL-THOMPSON PRESENT.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER COLLINS IS NOT HERE.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH ANY OF THE CASES THAT WE ARE SEEING TODAY? NO, NO. OKAY.

MOVING ON.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

I KNOW EVERYBODY PROBABLY SAW THAT SECOND NOTICE THAT CAME OUT.

THERE WAS A CHANGE TO THE MINUTES FROM THE ORIGINAL.

SURE THEY ARE HERE.

HAS ANYBODY DOES ANYBODY SEE ANYTHING IN THE MINUTES THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED? OKAY.

NO CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES.

OKAY. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

ALL RIGHT.

THROUGH HERE.

CATHERINE, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? NO PUBLIC COMMENT HAS BEEN RECEIVED.

OKAY. NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

MEMBERS SO THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE VOTE WE WILL NOT APPROVE.

DOES ANYBODY SEE ANYTHING IN THIS CASE THAT THEY WANT US TO PULL THE CASE FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PUT IT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA SO THAT YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS AND EXPLORE FURTHER.

NO. ALREADY HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT.

OKAY. CAN I HAVE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT.

OKAY. SECOND.

WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT.

NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEARINGS.

OUR FIRST CASE IS CASE 24 LC-005, WHICH IS 2101 STRAND.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE, INCLUDING THE INSTALLATION OF A CANOPY.

EIGHT NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RETURNED.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN ORDER TO MODIFY THE BUILDING TO ADD A CANOPY.

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 THE ABOVE STATED DESIGN STANDARDS.

SANBORN MAPS INDICATE THAT THEIR BUILDING ORIGINALLY HAD A CANOPY.

THE CANOPY ALONG STRAND ON 21ST STREET IS SHOWN ON THE 1885, 1889 AND 1899 SANBORN MAPS.

IT WAS REMOVED BY THE PUBLICATION OF THE 1912 MAP, WHICH SAYS NO CANOPY PRESENT.

HOWEVER, THE 1947 SANBORN MAP SHOWS A CANOPY ON THE STRAND FAÇADE AND A CANOPY ALONG APPROXIMATELY HALF THE BUILDING'S LENGTH ALONG [INAUDIBLE] 21ST STREET. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO SUBMITTED A HISTORIC PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE CANOPY IN PLACE.

THE APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL DEPICTS A SIMPLE FLAT CANOPY WHICH WILL SERVE AS A BALCONY WITH A SIMPLE HAND RAILING DESIGN AND CANOPY COLUMNS WHICH DO NOT DETRACT FROM OR BLOCK THE FAÇADE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH SPECIFIC CONDITION ONE.

THE APPLICANT SHALL CONFORM TO THE DESIGN, MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT SHOWN IN ATTACHED EXHIBIT A OF THE STAFF REPORT AND STANDARD CONDITIONS TWO THROUGH SIX AND WE HAVE SOME PICTURES. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE HISTORIC PHOTOGRAPH THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED SHOWING THE CANOPY IN PLACE.

AND THE FIRST OF THE SANBORN'S.

AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED CANOPY.

AND THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, EAST, SOUTH AND WEST.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

AND I WILL NOTE FOR THE RECORD, THE COUNCIL MEMBER COLLINS HAS JOINED US.

OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ABOUT THIS, THIS CASE? NO. OKAY.

I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF MR. GAERTNER IS PRESENT.

WANTS TO TALK ABOUT THIS.

I THINK IT'S PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY, BUT I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? MY NAME IS MICHAEL GAERTNER.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GAERTNER? NOW, THEY SAID, WE SAW ANOTHER ONE OF YOUR PROJECTS OR BUILDINGS THAT LAST MEETING, RIGHT? YEAH. I SEEM TO BE THE CANOPY GUY.

I KNOW, I KNOW, WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

[00:05:04]

SOME MORE COMING UP.

SO I'LL BE BACK. I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE THESE CANOPIES COME BACK.

SO THANK YOU.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GARTNER? NO. OKAY.

IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? NO. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, BRING IT BACK TO THIS COMMISSION AND ASK FOR A MOTION ON CASE 24 LC-005, SARAH.

I MOVE TO APPROVE CASE 24 LC-005 PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? OKAY, WE HAVE A SECOND DISCUSSION.

NO, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

WE'RE PRETTY EXCITED OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY, THIS IS APPROVED.

ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO OUR SECOND CASE, WHICH IS 24 LC-008.

THIS IS 1210 BROADWAY AVENUE J.

REQUEST FOR DISTRICT CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE, INCLUDING A FRONT DOOR REPLACEMENT.

EIGHT NOTICES WERE SENT, THREE RETURNED, TWO IN FAVOR AND ONE IN OPPOSITION.

BACKGROUND. LANDMARK COMMISSION CONSIDERED A REQUEST TO THIS LOCATION ON MARCH 6TH OF 2023.

AT THAT TIME, THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN RED TAGGED FOR REMOVING HISTORIC WINDOWS AND REPLACING THEM WITH FRENCH DOORS.

THE REQUEST WAS TO RETAIN THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE.

THE CASE WAS DENIED WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE WINDOWS BE REPLACED WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE DECISION, AND THE WINDOWS HAVE SINCE BEEN REPLACED.

SUMMARY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE FRONT DOOR WITH A DOOR OF A DIFFERENT STYLE.

THIS WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED.

PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENT A FOR THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL.

PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

CONFORMANCE STAFF FINDS THE REQUEST DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

THE MODIFICATIONS ARE LOCATED IN LOCATION A, PRIMARY FAÇADE, IN WHICH PRESERVATION AND REPAIR OF FEATURES IN PLACE IS THE PRIORITY.

THE DESIGN STANDARDS SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT ORIGINAL DOOR SIZES AND SHAPES SHOULD BE RETAINED.

THE DESIGN STANDARDS ALSO STATE THAT WHEN REPLACING A HISTORIC DOOR, TO USE A DESIGN THAT APPEARS SIMILAR TO THE ORIGINAL DOOR, THE ORIGINAL DOOR DESIGN WAS A DOUBLE SOLID WOOD WITH TWO DOUBLE SOLID WOOD DOORS.

THE DOOR THAT HAS BEEN INSTALLED INCLUDES SIDELIGHTS AND DECORATIVE GLASS, WHICH WERE NOT AN ORIGINAL FEATURE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION DUE TO DON CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CASE BE DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.

ONE, THE HOUSE SHALL BE RETURNED TO ITS ORIGINAL APPEARANCE AND SHOWN AS IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND ATTACHMENT A WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION, AND THEN TWO THE STANDARD CONDITION REGARDING APPEALS.

AND WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND A CLOSE UP PICTURE OF THE DOOR THAT'S BEEN INSTALLED.

THIS IS A PICTURE IN 2020.

STAFF'S PICTURES FROM 2015.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE WERE AT THAT TIME WERE SOME SCREEN DOORS AND SOLID DOUBLE DOORS.

AND THEY CAN BE SEEN IN THIS PICTURE FROM 2023 AS WELL.

AND THESE ARE THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

OKAY, I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

IS THIS A NEW REQUEST FROM A DIFFERENT OWNER? BECAUSE DIDN'T WE ALREADY RENDER THIS OPINION LAST TIME THAT THEY NEEDED TO CHANGE THE DOORS AND THE WINDOWS TO THIS PROPERTY? AT THAT TIME IT WAS JUST THE WINDOWS.

SO THIS IS A PICTURE FROM THAT CASE OKAY.

OKAY. SO YOU CAN THE DOORS OPEN.

RIGHT. SO AT THAT TIME WE WERE JUST DEALING WITH THE WINDOWS.

THAT DOOR WAS IN PLACE OKAY.

AND IT WAS REPLACED AFTER THAT ALREADY.

OKAY. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

NO. OKAY. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF MRS. [INAUDIBLE] IS PRESENT.

AM I SAYING? I'VE NOT HEARD, BUT WE ARE.

WE JUST PURCHASED 1210 BROADWAY.

OH, OKAY. SO YOU ARE NEW OWNERS? I THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE SOME NEW OWNERS HERE.

SO LET ME JUST BEFORE WE OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS ACTUALLY THE FORMER OWNER, NOT YOU.

CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

BUT YOU SHE NO LONGER OWNS THIS PROPERTY.

YOU DO? CORRECT.

LEGALLY OWN IT.

YES. OKAY.

SO LEGAL. WHAT DO WE DO IN THAT CASE? . WELL, HE SOLD THE PROPERTY.

THEY ARE THE NEW OWNERS.

[00:10:06]

. OKAY.

WELL, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE BECAUSE THEY MAKE THE APPLICATION FOUR WEEKS AGO FOR THIS HEARING AND THEN YOU, YOU CLOSED ON THE PROPERTY IN THE INTERIM.

CORRECT. AND WE WERE UNAWARE OF ANYTHING, ANY RED TAGS OR ANYTHING.

RIGHT.

SO I THINK TO BE FAIR TO YOU WE NEED TO TAKE COUNCIL'S RECOMMENDATION AND WITHDRAW THIS CASE AND GIVE YOU TIME TO WORK WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER ABOUT YOUR NEW PROPERTY SO THAT YOU KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON, BECAUSE YOU'RE KIND OF BEING THROWN INTO THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE, AND THAT'S NOT REALLY I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S REALLY FAIR TO A NEW OWNER.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE OWN TWO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

WE ARE VERY AWARE OF ALL THE GUIDELINES AND RESTRICTIONS, AND WE WERE UNAWARE OF WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH 1210 BROADWAY.

SO ONE OF THE REASONS WE CHOSE TO COME HERE TODAY WAS JUST TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO A LLEVIATE THE PROBLEM.

YEAH, WE WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

YEAH. OKAY.

SO I THINK BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE A DIFFERENT APPLICANT THAN WHAT'S CURRENTLY HERE.

SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS DEFER THIS AND LET STAFF AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING DEAL WITH THIS APPLICANT.

IN THE MEANTIME, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU CONTACT THIS CATHERINE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND SHE CAN WORK WITH YOU THROUGH MAKING YOUR OWN CASE.

AND THEN WE CAN VISIT AGAIN ON YOUR BEAUTIFUL PROPERTY.

OKAY. DO I NEED A MOTION TO WITHDRAW THIS? TO DEFER? DEFER IT.

SORRY. DO I NEED A MOTION TO DEFER? I WOULD MOVE THAT WE DENY THE CASE BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE APPLICANT NO LONGER OWNS THE PROPERTY.

BECAUSE PLANNING AND CATHERINE AND STAFF HAVE THEIR PROCEDURES THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH.

CATHERINE WOULD IT BE EASIER FOR Y'ALL TO DEAL WITH THIS IF WE JUST DENIED IT, OR IF WE JUST WITH DEFERRED IT? WELL, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE DEALT WITH A CASE THAT HAD AN OWNERSHIP CHANGE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

I KNOW, SO I'M DOING PRETTY GOOD HERE.

I MUST SAY WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT.

BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S A MOOT CASE BECAUSE THAT'S THE OWNERSHIP IS I MEAN, THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT THE OWNERS ANY LONGER.

SO IF YOU IF WE SIMPLY DEFER IT, DOESN'T THAT JUST GO BACK INTO YOUR ROTATION OF CASES TO DEAL WITH AGAIN.

SURE. AND VOTE TO DENY? I THINK YOU CAN DO EITHER.

YOU CAN DEFER AND DEFER IT AND WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT, OR YOU CAN DENY IT AND WE'LL WE'LL START WITH THE NEW OWNERS, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CASE? LAURA BOURGEOIS, GALVESTON HISTORICAL FOUNDATION.

JUST CLARIFICATION, DID THIS COME ABOUT BECAUSE OF A RED TAG, OR DID THE APPLICANT JUST WILLINGLY SUBMIT THE CASE BECAUSE THE LAST TIME WAS A RED TAG FOR THE WINDOWS? CORRECT. BUT THE THE DOOR, THEY APPLY FOR THE DOOR.

IT'S BEEN THERE A LONG TIME.

HE IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE THEY CHANGED THE WINDOWS BACK TO WHAT WE ASKED THEM TO CHANGE IT TO.

SO THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IF IT WAS A RED TAG, IT WAS A RED TAG.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO IT WILL GO BACK TO ROTATION.

RIGHT? OKAY. GOT IT.

OKAY. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS CASE? WHAT IS A RED TAG? I'LL EXPLAIN TO YOU AFTER.

I ORDERED A STOP WORK.

OKAY, SO I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THIS COMMISSION.

AND I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY THIS CASE DUE TO THE LACK OF AN ACTUAL APPLICANT IN THE CASE HAS GONE.

WE HAD A MOTION FROM NANCY FOR FOR DENIAL.

[INAUDIBLE] SECOND.

SECOND IT. OH, FOR THE SAME THING.

YEAH. SECOND IT. OKAY.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY. WELL, THAT WAS INTERESTING.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON.

LICENSE TO USE THE NEXT CASE IS 24 LC-007 2202 STRAND.

[00:15:07]

ALRIGHTY. AS STATED 24 LC-007 LICENSED USE REQUEST FOR 2202 STRAND.

THE COLONEL BUBBIES BUILDING OR THE WILLIAM MOODY BUILDING.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A DEFERRAL OF THE ABOVE REFERENCE REQUEST UNTIL THE APRIL 1ST, 2024 REGULAR MEETING IN ORDER TO VERIFY SOME PROJECT CONDITIONS.

THIS IS THE FIRST REQUEST FOR DEFERRAL.

THERE WERE NO COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE REQUEST.

CAN I GET A MOTION TO DEFER? THEY WANT TO DEFER UNTIL THE.

THEY'LL HAVE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO WANTS TO ADDRESS IT.

JUST MESSING WITH ME TODAY.

OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. OKAY.

OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CASE.

YES. PLEASE STEP FORWARD.

CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN, PLEASE? MY NAME IS ROBERT GIBBON.

VICTORIA GIBBON. WOULD YOU MIND HANDING THAT [INAUDIBLE].

THOSE ARE SOME PHOTOS THAT I'VE TAKEN OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING ABOUT THE RIGHT TO USE. I MEAN, MY MY WIFE AND I, WE DROVE OVER AN HOUR.

I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF THE SAFETY FACTORS.

IF YOU CAN SEE I'VE WATCHED IT NOW FOR WE PURCHASED THE LEVY BUILDING BACK ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO.

AND ABSOLUTELY NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO THE OUTSIDE OF THAT BUILDING DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME THAT WE'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR TO IT.

WE OWN THREE DIFFERENT PIECES OF PROPERTY IN THAT AREA.

YOU KNOW, YOU PASSED OUT THE PAPERWORK.

YOU CAN TAKE A MOMENT AND REVIEW ALL OF IT.

YOU'LL SEE MY CONCERNS ON THE LAST PAGE.

I THINK IT'S ALL PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY.

SO I OPPOSE THE WHOLE SCENARIO BECAUSE ACTUALLY, WHAT IT LOOKS TO ME AND I SEE CONSISTENTLY THAT IS A VERY BUSY STREET BECAUSE OF THE FISHERMAN'S WHARF.

I MEAN, I'VE ACTUALLY SEEN PEOPLE OUT WITH THEIR BABY AND THEIR STROLLERS WHEN THE JUBILEE BOAT IS PARKED THERE ON SATURDAYS, YOU CAN'T EVEN GET THROUGH THERE.

I OWN THE LOT NEXT DOOR TO THE ROOF GARDEN AS WELL, AND TRYING TO GO DOWN THE BACK ALLEY.

YOU CAN'T GET THERE.

SO IF THE TROLLEY CAR IS COMING, YOU CAN SEE WHERE I'VE TAKEN PICTURES OF THE PEOPLE OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET.

THAT'S THE FIRST PICTURE.

THE SECOND PICTURE SHOWS HOW THEY JUST PARK 5 OR 6 VEHICLES IN THE FENCED IN AREA.

NOW, NOBODY ELSE ACTUALLY HAS THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT.

AND SO IN THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE AND I'VE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME, WE ACTUALLY ACQUIRED OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA AS WELL.

AND IN MY OPINION, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CONCERNS.

SO AS YOU KNOW, Y'ALL, THAT'S WHY WE TOOK THE PICTURES AND THAT'S WHY WE CAME DOWN HERE TODAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME. APPRECIATE YOUR ACTIVISM AND CITIZENSHIP AND COMING IN AND BEING CONCERNED FOR OTHER TOURIST AND AND RESIDENTS DOWN THERE THAT YOU'RE SHOWING ME THINGS I HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

OKAY. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE? NO. OKAY. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND TAKE A MOTION TO DEFER TILL APRIL 1ST.

I MOVE THAT WE DEFER CASE 24 LC-007 FOR APPLICANT'S REQUEST UNTIL APRIL 21ST.

[INAUDIBLE] IS IT 21ST OR 1ST, APRIL 1ST.

OKAY. SECOND.

SHARON SECONDS IT.

DISCUSSION. OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY, I DID HAVE A QUESTION.

I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE PUBLIC COMMENT RELATED TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

[00:20:03]

I JUST HAD A QUESTION, BY US DEFERRING IT, WE'RE NOT REALLY AT AT A POINT WHERE WE CAN CONSIDER HIS COMMENTS WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US AFTER THE DEFERRAL PERIOD, WILL WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY? WELL, WE'VE ALREADY SEEN IT, SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE CAN FORGET IT.

RIGHT. AND WHAT WHAT HIS CONCERN IS.

SO I THINK THAT'LL BE, YOU KNOW, IN OUR MINDS THAT HE HAS BROUGHT FORTH THESE THINGS THAT ARE CONCERN.

BUT HE DIDN'T REALIZE THOUGH I WON'T FORGET.

SO I HAVE QUESTIONS WHEN WE I HAVE QUESTIONS AND BUT WE HAVE TO GIVE THE APPLICANT THEIR TIME TO COME FORWARD AND EXPLAIN WHY THEY WANT TO EXTEND AND RIGHT TO USE AND, AND ADDRESS SOME OF THESE ISSUES.

BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN TALK ABOUT RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

OKAY. SO DO I NEED TO COME BACK DOWN HERE IF YOU WOULD LIKE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

BUT I YOU KNOW I DON'T I'M HAPPY TO SELF-EXPLANATORY.

RIGHT. AND AND I DON'T, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONERS WANT TO HOLD ON TO THEIR PAPERWORK FOR TWO MORE WEEKS.

AND WE CAN RETHINK ABOUT THIS AS WE'RE HEARING THE OTHER SIDE OF IT.

SO. BUT I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN VERY MUCH.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY. MOTION TO DEFER PASSES.

ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING FOR DISCUSSION ITEMS? NO. SURE.

I'M REALLY QUIET.

OKAY. WE'RE ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.