Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:01]

ALL RIGHT. I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

[Landmark Commission on July 15, 2024.]

TODAY IS MONDAY, JULY 15TH, AND THE TIME IS 4:00.

BEFORE WE GO INTO ATTENDANCE, I WOULD LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THE SEATING OF TWO ALTERNATES ONTO THE DAIS AS OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS. WELL, THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT APPOINTED AS FULL COMMISSIONERS YET.

BUT THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO HAPPEN AT THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING, WHICH IS NEXT WEEK.

BUT IT'S ASSUMED.

IT'S ASSUMED THAT IT WILL HAPPEN.

YES. NO DOUBT.

TERRY JOHNSON ON MY FAR LEFT AND CHRISTINE BOURGEOIS ON MY FAR RIGHT.

BOTH HAVE BEEN BIG CONTRIBUTORS AS ALTERNATES, SO WE ARE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING THEM ON THE COMMISSION.

WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO ATTENDANCE.

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

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES IS EVERYBODY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MINUTES.

DO WE NOTE ANY CHANGES OR CORRECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE? NO. THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

CATHERINE. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? PUBLIC COMMENT WAS RECEIVED. OKAY.

WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEARINGS.

OUR FIRST CASE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS CASE 24 LC -018.

THIS IS 1420 CHURCH REAR.

IT'S A REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE, INCLUDING WINDOW REPLACEMENT.

EIGHT NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RETURNED.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND IN ORDER TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS IN THE REAR HOUSE WITH NEW VINYL WINDOWS.

ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE, THE WINDOWS ARE IN POOR CONDITION AND CANNOT BE REPAIRED.

THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT WINDOWS ARE ONE OVER ONE VINYL.

PLEASE NOTE THE DESIGN STANDARDS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

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

THE DESIGN STANDARDS STATE THAT ORIGINAL WINDOWS SHOULD BE REPAIRED RATHER THAN REPLACED WHENEVER POSSIBLE.

WHEN REPAIR IS NOT FEASIBLE, THE DESIGN STANDARDS STATE THAT REPLACEMENT WINDOWS SHOULD MATCH THE DESIGN AND MATERIALS OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS A MIX OF WINDOW STYLES, INCLUDING SIX OVER SIX, TWO OVER TWO, AND ONE OVER ONE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE METAL WINDOW.

THE CURRENT WINDOWS ARE WOOD.

THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT MATCH THE DESIGN AND MATERIALS OF THE CURRENT WINDOWS DUE TO NON-CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE CASE BE DENIED.

HOWEVER, SHOULD THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FIND THE REQUEST CONFORMS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MAY BE APPROPRIATE AND THEN THE SPECIFIC CONDITION AND STANDARD CONDITIONS.

EXCUSE ME. OUR LIST FOR YOU IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

WE HAVE SOME PICTURES. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH IS A REAR STRUCTURE.

THIS IS WHAT'S VISIBLE FROM THE ALLEY.

AND THEN WE HAVE PICTURES PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT OF THE WINDOWS AND THEIR CONDITION.

A COUPLE OF PAGES OF THAT.

AND THAT 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 THE OWNER OR REPRESENTATIVE VALLIANT IS HERE.

COULD YOU STEP UP, STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN.

PLEASE TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR PROPERTY.

IT'S A DUAL HOUSE PROPERTY.

LIKE THEY SAID, IT'S IN THE HOUSE IN QUESTION.

LET ME JUST STOP YOU FOR A SECOND.

IF I CAN GET YOU TO ANNOUNCE YOUR NAME ON THE MIC.

SURE. AND SIGN IN, PLEASE, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE WATCHING US ONLINE.

OH, OKAY. BASICALLY, THEY'RE IRREPARABLE.

THEY WERE IN THE 2008 STORM AND WERE SOAKING FOR WEEKS ON END AND JUST ARE NOT ABLE TO BE REPAIRED.

THEY'RE BASICALLY HELD TOGETHER WITH THEY WEREN'T REPAIRED PROPERLY.

SO THEY'RE HELD TOGETHER WITH ESSENTIALLY CAULK THE WINDOW THEY'RE POPPING OUT AND THEY'RE THE ACTUALLY THE STRUCTURE OF THE WINDOW NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED AND WE CAN'T FIND ANY OTHER TYPE OF WINDOW TO REPLACE THEM.

SO WE WENT WITH A REAL HIGH GRADE.

WE'RE GOING WITH A REAL HIGH GRADE, IMPACT RESISTANT VINYL WINDOW.

OKAY. SO HAVE YOU BEEN THE OWNER SINCE 2008? NO, SINCE 2020.

OKAY. YOU PURCHASED 220.

OKAY. MY NAME IS TERRY VALIENTE.

[00:05:01]

ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS. VALIENTE? NO.

OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANKS. IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ABOUT THIS CASE? NO. OKAY. I'M GOING TO BRING IT.

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, BRING IT BACK TO THIS COMMISSION AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON CASE 24 LC-018.

YOU CAN'T GET IN OR OUT OF THEM.

IT'S NOT A EVERYBODY WANTS A HOUSE WITH WINDOWS.

YOU CAN OPEN AND CLOSE.

YEAH, WE'VE GO.

WE'RE GOING WITH A HIGH-GRADE WINDOW SO.

PLEASE GRANT ME THE PERMISSION TO CHANGE MY WINDOWS.

THANK YOU. HOW MANY HAVE ARE YOU ASKING TO REPLACE? ALL NINE.

AND ARE THEY ON ALL FOUR SIDES OF THE HOUSE? THEY ARE. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS CASE.

OKAY. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THIS COMMISSION AND ASK MY COMMISSIONERS TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON CASE 24.

LC-018. SARAH.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE.

CASE 24 LC-018.

STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

KNOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS WAS TO DEFER DENIAL.

WHAT YOU COULD SAY IS THAT YOU MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITIONS PROVIDED BY STAFF, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THOSE ON THE RECORD.

GOTCHA. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE 24-018 WITH STAFF'S CONDITIONS.

OKAY, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS IS DENIAL.

RIGHT, BUT THEY HAVE CONDITIONS FOR IF WE DO APPROVE IT, RIGHT.

IF WE DO, WE CALL THESE OR HOWEVER CONDITIONS AND THEY ARE IN THE CASE THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVES THE REQUEST, THEN THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT WILL BE HELD TO THE APPROVAL.

RIGHT. BUT BASICALLY, IT'S A DENIAL OF THE REQUEST.

I BELIEVE THAT THE COMMISSIONER'S MOTION WAS FOR APPROVAL.

FOR APPROVAL. OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO SECOND THAT? NO. THE MOTION FAILS.

OKAY, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS DENIAL.

I UNDERSTAND THE HARDSHIP.

EVERYBODY THAT OWNS AN HISTORIC HOME DEALS WITH THESE WINDOWS, BUT THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES.

YOU CAN HAVE WOOD WINDOWS REMADE.

ACTUALLY, PROBABLY LESS EXPENSIVE THAN VINYL WINDOWS.

THERE ARE PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THAT WILL REMAKE THEM.

THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WILL ACTUALLY REPAIR THEM, AND THEY DO LEND TO THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY.

MY HEART GOES OUT TO YOU IF YOU'VE INVESTED A BUNCH OF MONEY INTO THIS, I UNDERSTAND.

WE ALL DO BECAUSE WE DEAL WITH THESE HEALTH.

BUT THAT IS MY MOTION.

SO THAT. THAT'S MY MOTION IS TO APPROVE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS DENIAL.

I'LL SECOND. OKAY.

DISCUSSION. NO.

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE READY TO VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR? IT IS UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU.

NOW, I BELIEVE THERE'S NO THERE'S THAT WAS ONE TWO, THREE, FOUR FIVE IN FAVOR.

OKAY. SORRY.

MY VICE CHAIR. I IGNORE ALL THE TIME.

ARE THERE ANY VOTES IN OPPOSITION? THANK YOU. OKAY.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. MOVING ON TO CASE 20.

I'LL TALK TO HER IN THE AIR. OKAY.

BUT. OUR CATHERINE, I THINK, IS GOING TO TALK WITH YOU.

OKAY. YEAH. I'M NEVER DOING ANYTHING LIKE THIS.

YEAH, I'M UNAWARE OF.

NO, NO. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

OKAY MOVING ON TO CASE 24 LC-019 1412 ROSENBERG.

ALRIGHTY. SO, THIS IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUEST FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE, INCLUDING REPLACEMENT OF THE FRONT DOOR AND ALTERNATIVE DECKING MATERIAL.

THERE WERE SIX PUBLIC NOTICES SENT.

NONE OF THOSE WERE RETURNED.

SO, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE EXISTING FRONT DOOR.

THIS DOOR IS NOT BELIEVED TO BE ORIGINAL.

AND BOTH THE DOOR AND THE FRAME ARE DEGRADED ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANTS NARRATIVE.

THE APPLICANT IS ALSO THE SECOND PART OF THIS REQUEST, PROPOSING TO REPLACE THE UPPER FRONT BALCONY DECKING WITH AZEK COMPOSITION DECKING.

THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED, INCLUDING PHOTOS OF THE DOOR AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE DECKING MATERIAL INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS EXHIBIT A.

[00:10:05]

PLEASE NOTE THE APPLICABLE DESIGN STANDARDS.

STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST PARTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

THE MODIFICATIONS ARE LOCATED IN LOCATION.

A PRIMARY FACADE WHERE PRESERVATION AND REPAIR IN PLACE IS A PRIORITY.

DESIGN STANDARDS SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT ORIGINAL DOORS SHOULD BE RETAINED IN THIS CASE IS BELIEVE THE EXISTING DOOR ISN'T ORIGINAL.

HOWEVER AS PER STAFF'S TYPICAL PROCEDURES, WE ARE TAKING A STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND RECOMMEND AGAINST THAT PARTICULAR PART OF THIS REQUEST.

THE DESIGN STANDARDS DO NOT SPECIFICALLY PROHIBIT THE USE OF COMPOSITION DECKING, AND THE SPECIFICATIONS INDICATE THE PROPOSED MATERIAL IS SMOOTH AND LACKING A RUSTICATED OR PATTERNED SURFACE.

SIMILAR TO WHAT WE REQUIRE FOR, SAY, HARDY BOARD OR SIMILAR COMPOSITE MATERIALS.

ALSO, THE DESIGN STANDARDS PERMIT ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL IN PORCHES OR DECK BOARDS OR SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATED.

AND IN THIS CASE, THE PROPOSED DECK IS GOING TO BE AT THE SECOND FLOOR WELL ABOVE THE PEDESTRIAN EYE LEVEL.

SO, STAFF RECOMMENDS REQUEST BE APPROVED WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS ONE AND STANDARD CONDITIONS TWO THROUGH FIVE.

WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS.

SO, WE HAVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE ON THE LEFT.

AND THEN A JUST A VICINITY MAP SHOWING WHERE IT SITS ON THE BLOCK ON THE RIGHT.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE WE HAVE SOME OF THE APPLICANTS SUBMITTAL SHOWING THE EXISTING FRONT DOOR OF THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT OF A DOOR.

THAT'S ESSENTIALLY THE SAME, EXCEPT THEY ALSO PROPOSED TO ADD A DECORATIVE COLOR OF GLASS THAT MATCHES THE EXISTING FOYER WINDOW THAT'S ALREADY ON THE HOUSE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND WE HAVE THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, TO THE SOUTH TO THE WEST.

AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

THANK YOU. DANIEL. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR DANIEL? NO. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF THE APPLICANT, MR. EASTERWOOD, OR THE PROPERTY OWNER, MR. MAYS, WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND TALK.

COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN? YOU KNOW. YEAH.

BRAD EASTERWOOD, 123 25TH STREET.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S A COUPLE FILES ON HERE.

IT'S NOT MUCH DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU GUYS JUST PRESENTED, BUT.

THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT FILES.

THANK YOU. COMMISSION.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

THANK YOU, DANIEL, FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND YOUR WORK.

THIS HOUSE YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN BEFORE.

A COUPLE TIMES, WE DID A PRETTY SIZABLE KITCHEN ADDITION, MASTER BEDROOM ADDITION ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE SOME YEARS AGO.

AND THEN I THINK YOU'VE SEEN PROBABLY AT LEAST THREE DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THEIR GARAGE APARTMENT, WHICH WAS FINALLY BUILT.

THOSE OF US THAT HAVE BEEN HERE FOR A WHILE.

RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT.

SO. YES.

BOTH. YEAH.

WE CAN LOOK AT THE DOOR FIRST.

HERE. THIS IS A PICTURE THAT DANIEL HAD INCLUDED IN HIS PRESENTATION.

IT'S JUST A SHOT OF THE EXISTING DOOR.

YOU CAN SEE IT'S PRETTY WEATHERED.

IT'S BEEN FAIRLY WELL PROTECTED BY THE SCREEN DOOR, BUT IT IS OBVIOUSLY, IT'S NOT IN GREAT SHAPE.

AND THAT'S BASICALLY AN ASSESSMENT BY JOHN ABRAMSON OF WOOD SOLUTIONS.

SO NEXT SLIDE.

THAT'S THE COPY OF THE DOOR WITH THAT DECORATIVE COLORED GLASS UP ABOVE.

BASICALLY, THE SAME WOOD PANELS BELOW.

AND THEN NEXT THIS IS EXISTING WINDOW THAT WE, WE THINK COULD HAVE BEEN MIMICKED ON THE FRONT DOOR, KIND OF CREATING A NICE FOYER THERE WITH, WITH COLORED GLASS ON, ON BOTH SIDES WHERE, WHERE THE LIGHT'S COMING IN.

AND THEN THIS IS ALSO IN YOUR PACKET TOO, BUT IS SHOWING KIND OF THE, THE DAMAGE THAT THE HINGES THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE DOOR.

REALLY, THEY SHOULDN'T BE HANGING FROM THE TRIM, BUT THEY ARE PARTIALLY.

AND SO THIS PART OF THE FRAME ALSO NEEDS TO BE REPLACED, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE, THE STRUCTURAL FRAMING BEHIND THAT PIECE OF WOOD.

NEXT. MORE OF THE SAME.

JUST SEEING HOW THE DOORS HANGING FROM THE TRIM WHERE IT SHOULDN'T BE.

THIS IS ONE OF THE REPLACEMENT HINGES, WHICH IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE TYPE OF HINGE FOR A DOOR LIKE THIS.

AND THEN I JUST TOOK A COUPLE OTHER PICTURES HERE JUST TO SHOW THAT SIMILAR WINDOW PATTERN.

BOTH OF THESE HOUSES ARE, ARE VICTORIANS ABOUT THE SAME AGE AS BRYAN'S? MAYBE A LITTLE BIT YOUNGER, BUT NOT BY MUCH.

AND THEY'RE BOTH IN SILK STOCKING, BASICALLY AROUND THE CORNER FROM BRYAN'S HOUSE.

IN FACT, THE ONE ON THE LEFT, THEY SHARE THEY SHARE AN ALLEY BEHIND THAT HOUSE.

[00:15:06]

AND SO THAT REALLY IS OUR REQUEST FOR THE DOOR IS TO REBUILD IT WITH MAHOGANY MATERIALS TO MATCH BASICALLY WHAT YOU SEE IN THAT DESIGN DRAWING.

AND THEN THIS IS THE BALCONY IN QUESTION HERE IS WELL ABOVE EYE LINE AS EYESIGHT.

AS DANIEL SAID.

IT'S A PRODUCT THAT WE ACTUALLY USED ON THE ADDITION IN THE BACK.

SO, IT'S ALREADY THERE ON THE PROPERTY IN ONE INSTANCE.

AND WON'T BE SEEN.

THE ENDS OF THE BOARDS MAY BE SEEN, BUT NOTHING MORE THAN YOU'LL SEE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT NOW.

AND THAT'S JUST SHOWING DETERIORATION.

IN SAME. OKAY.

ANY QUESTIONS? IS THE DOOR THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO BUILD? IS IT LARGER? SAME SIZE, SAME EXACT SIZE.

SAME SIZE. THICKER.

THICKER. THICKER? YES.

STRONGER WOOD. STRONGER WOOD.

THIS WAS PROBABLY THE EXISTING FRONT DOOR.

WAS PROBABLY MORE OF AN INTERIOR DOOR AT ONE POINT.

YEAH. IT'S ABOUT.

IT'S ABOUT AN INCH AND 3/8 THICK AND THAT'S TYPICALLY AN INTERIOR DIMENSION.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. EASTERWOOD. ALL RIGHT.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS CASE? I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE.

NO. OKAY.

I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

OKAY. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE.

CASE 24 LC-019 FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY. HOW DO I NEED TO VERIFY? YOU NEED TO VERIFY THE DOOR.

IT'S IN THERE.

IT'S IN THE FRONT REQUEST.

YEAH, IT'S ON THE REQUEST LISTED ON THE COVER PAGE.

FRONT DECKING, ALTERNATIVE DECKING MATERIAL.

AND THEN STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE NEW DOOR.

THEY RECOMMEND REPAIRING SO FORTH.

SO IS YOUR MOTION INCLUDING A NEW DOOR OR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF REPAIRING THE EXISTING DOOR.

THE NEW DOOR. OKAY, THEN.

WILL YOU RESTATE YOUR MOTION, PLEASE? YES. JUST ONE SECOND.

OKAY, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CASE 24 LC-019 WITH A, THE BUILDING OF A NEW DOOR.

YEAH. SO THAT WOULD BE STRIKING CONDITION 1A.

STRIKING CONDITION 1A.

OKAY. AND APPROVING THE DECKING FURNITURE DECK OKAY.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND OVER HERE JANE SECONDED IT.

DISCUSSION. I CAN'T FAULT ANYBODY FOR NOT WANTING A STRONGER, MORE DURABLE DOOR. AND SO MANY OF THESE HOUSES, IT'S NOT EVEN JUST THE DOOR'S NOT DURABLE, BUT THE HARDWARE THAT'S ON THEM IS NOT DURABLE ANYMORE.

AND IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.

I MEAN, AGAIN, I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY, POSSIBLY, BUT IT'S IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN OR YOUNG KIDS OVER AND THE DOOR DOESN'T SHUT PROPERLY, AND THEY GET BACK OUT AGAIN. IF YOU HAVE A, YOU KNOW, 120 MILE AN HOUR WINDS ON A CAT, IT COULD BE ANY NUMBER OF THINGS.

BUT I THINK WE'RE FINDING OUT ON A LOT OF THESE HISTORIC HOMES THAT SOMETIMES WE GET TO A POINT WHERE THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL JUST WEARS OUT AND IT CANNOT BE, IT HAS TO BE RECREATED. BONDO IT ANYMORE.

YEAH. THERE'S NOT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH BONDO TO HOLD THAT TOGETHER ANYMORE.

OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY. ARE WE READY FOR A VOTE? ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

OKAY. DISCUSSION ITEM.

AS YOU KNOW, I ONLY HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MEETINGS LEFT HERE, AND THEN I'M ON MY WAY OUT THE DOOR.

YOU'RE NOT GONNA HOLD ME BACK THIS TIME.

BUT I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS I ALWAYS THOUGHT WE SHOULD DO WOULD LIKE TO SEE DONE IS THAT WHEN A PROPERTY OWNER COMES IN, THERE ARE CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH, WHEN THEY REQUEST FOR REPLACEMENT OF A FRONT DOOR AND THAT FRONT DOOR IS EXACTLY LIKE THE EXISTING FRONT DOOR OR A ONE THAT WAS FROM A PREVIOUS ERA.

SO EITHER THE EXISTING FRONT DOOR THAT'S ON THERE, WHICH OF COURSE, WHEN THEY BUY AN HISTORIC PROPERTY, THOSE THINGS ARE GRANDFATHERED IN, OR IF THEY HAVE A PICTURE OF A EARLIER DOOR THAT THEY WANT TO GO IN AND REPLACE IT.

[00:20:02]

OR IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DOOR IS AND THE DOOR FALLS WITHIN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, THAT THAT COULD BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED.

IT'S ONLY REQUEST OUTSIDE OF THAT THAT WOULD NEED TO COME BEFORE US.

SO PERFECT EXAMPLE IS THIS REQUEST THAT WE HEARD TODAY WOULD NOT NEED TO COME BEFORE US.

THAT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED BECAUSE THEY WANT A NEW DOOR.

OLD ONES WORN OUT.

IT LOOKS EXACTLY THE SAME.

THE GLASS WASN'T AN ISSUE, BUT.

BUT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS COMING FROM THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.

SO, THEY CAN ONLY PUT FORTH WHAT'S IN PRINT.

IT'S UP FOR US TO INTERPRET THAT.

BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR STAFF IS A NO BRAINER.

SO HOW CAN WE GO ABOUT WITHOUT A WORKSHOP THIS AND THEN SPECIFY? AND YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE'D NEED TO DO THAT.

I THINK I'M HEARING FROM THE COMMISSION THAT THAT YOU'RE GENERALLY IN CONSENSUS WITH THAT CHANGE.

SO, WE CAN JUST BRING FORWARD A CASE AT YOUR ONE OF YOUR AUGUST MEETINGS TO MAKE THAT CHANGE TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

WELL, WHAT DOES EVERYBODY ELSE THINK? NO, I AGREE COMPLETELY.

WE'VE SEEN AN INORDINATE NUMBER OF THESE REQUESTS THIS YEAR.

I WAS JUST LOOKING WHILE WE WERE SITTING HERE.

OUT OF THE 22 CASES WE'VE HAD THIS YEAR, SIX HAVE BEEN DOOR REPLACEMENTS.

SO THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE ETHER ABOUT DOORS.

MY DOORS ARE WEARING OUT.

YEAH.

PORCHES. WOOD PORCHES.

I'M ON MY THIRD NOW.

AND PORCHES. AND I THINK YOU GET TO A POINT IN TIME WHERE YOU GO EVEN ON MY PORCH.

IT'S JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, THE LAST TIME WE REPLACED THAT PORCH WE DID RECLAIMED LUMBER.

WE DID RECLAIMED LUMBER.

IT LASTED NO MORE THAN THE PRESSURE TREATED LUMBER.

WE JUST CAN'T GET THE ORIGINAL MATERIALS THAT THESE HOUSES WERE BUILT WITH.

YEAH. SO, IF WE CAN FIND, OF COURSE, FOR FRONT DOOR TO ME DOWN HERE, MAHOGANY IS A NO BRAINER.

IF YOU CAN'T GET THE ORIGINAL OR YOU KNOW THAT SPECIES OF WOOD, WHICH I THINK THE ONLY ONES THAT HAVE IT ARE EITHER GOING TO BE IN A WAREHOUSE OR THEY'RE GOING TO BE THE SINKER PINE THAT THEY'RE DIGGING UP FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE MISSISSIPPI.

BUT THE POINT IS, THE MATERIAL IS NOT AVAILABLE, AND DOORS ARE FALLING APART.

AND I MEAN, THERE'S THAT IS, TO ME, THE EYE OF THE HOUSE.

THE DOORS, MOST INVITING THING ON THAT HOUSE, BESIDES THE BEAUTIFUL RAILINGS AND ALL OF THAT.

SO I FEEL LIKE IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE CAN INCENTIVIZE OWNERS TO REALIZE THAT THIS CAN BE DONE THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. OKAY. SO, WE'LL PREPARE A CASE.

WE'LL BRING IT TO YOU AT YOUR SECOND MEETING IN AUGUST TO AMEND THE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY APPROVAL FOR REPLICA DOORS.

SO IF YOU'RE MATCHING YOUR DOOR EXACTLY OR ONE FROM A PREVIOUS PICTURE, BECAUSE WHAT THEY HAD MAY NOT BE THE ORIGINAL, BUT LIKE HERE'S A PICTURE OF THE ORIGINAL AND MAKE IT OUT OF MAHOGANY. THAT WAS IT.

JUST A DOOR. THE GLASS.

BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS TIME THE GLASS IS DIFFERENT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT GLASS IS IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, JUST NOT WE'VE ALLOWED GLASS TO GO IN IN DIFFERENT CASES.

REMEMBER THE ONE THAT GOT US IN THE NEWSPAPER? THE ONE THAT, YES, THE ONE THAT GOT US IN THE FRONT PAGE OF THE NEWSPAPER WAS ABOUT THAT DOOR.

THAT WAS A LONG TIME AGO. I KNOW, I KNOW ABOUT THAT.

I WOULD SAY THAT WHAT WAS PROPOSED TODAY WASN'T MATCHING.

EXACTLY. SO, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE COMMISSION, YOU'RE SAYING IF IT'S 100% OF A MATCH TO THE CURRENT OR A PREVIOUS STORE, THEN THAT WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.

SO, SOMETHING LIKE TODAY WHERE THEY'RE DOING A DECORATIVE GLASS WOULD PROBABLY STILL NEED TO COME TO THE COMMISSION.

RIGHT. I SEE THAT THE STAINED GLASS TO MATCH THE SIDE GLASS.

I THINK WHAT SHE'S SAYING IS WHAT AND WHAT WE SAW IN THE PHOTO IS WHAT WAS MORE COMMONLY IS THE ONE THAT GOES AROUND WHERE THE FOUR SIDES ARE ONE COLOR AND THE CORNERS ARE A DIFFERENT COLOR. AND WE SEE THAT THROUGHOUT THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, THEY HAD SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT, ALTHOUGH THEY DID HAVE A LIVING EXAMPLE OF IT IN THE HOUSE, SO NOT THAT FAR OF A STRETCH.

I THINK JOHN SAID THAT THIS WASN'T THE ORIGINAL.

NO, NO, THE ORIGINAL DOOR MAY HAVE HAD THAT OTHER MATCHING GLASS BECAUSE THEY DID HAVE A PICTURE IN THE FOYER.

DO YOU HAVE A THOUGHT? THAT'S I MEAN, IT'S UNUSUAL.

OH COME ON. YEAH.

COME ON.

IT'S IT GETS A LITTLE MUDDIER, MORE MUDDIED, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK CATHERINE IS SAYING.

THIS ONE WOULD HAVE STILL COME TO LANDMARK BECAUSE IT'S CHANGING THAT GLASS, AND THERE'S NO WAY OF DOUBLE CHECKING THAT IT HAD STAINED GLASS BEFORE UNLESS THEY HAD A PICTURE.

BUT IT WASN'T AN EXACT REPLICA.

AND THEN SAME THING.

LIKE WHAT HAPPENS IF THEIR EXISTING DOOR IS LIKE A HOME DEPOT SPECIAL AND THEY'RE COMING FOR A REPLACEMENT DOOR? THAT OBVIOUSLY WASN'T THE ORIGINAL DOOR.

[00:25:02]

I THINK THAT WOULD STILL NEED TO COME TO LANDMARK.

YEAH. AND IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, LAURA BOURGEOIS GALVESTON HISTORICAL FOUNDATION STAFF ALWAYS HAS THE DISCRETION TO SEND SOMETHING TO LANDMARK IF WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH IT.

SO, IF IT'S ONE OF THESE KIND OF GRAY AREA DOORS, THEN WE CAN ALWAYS CHOOSE TO BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION.

BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT ALL THIS WHEN WE BRING IT BACK AS A CASE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ADD ON THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION? NEXT WE HAD ONE MORE DISCUSSION ITEM AND THAT STAFF PUT ON.

AND THAT'S LANDMARK COMMISSION VACANCIES.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'VE HAD ANOTHER RESIGNATION.

JULIE BAKER RESIGNED.

SHE SPENDS A LOT OF THE SUMMER OUT OF TOWN, AND SO SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE THRESHOLD FOR ATTENDANCE.

IT'S A REAL SHAME. I THOUGHT THAT JULIE WAS A TERRIFIC COMMISSIONER.

AND SHE BROUGHT A LOT OF GOOD EXPERIENCE TO THE COMMISSION, SO SHE WILL.

SHE WILL BE MISSED.

YES. SO THERE. CURRENTLY THE POSITIONS THAT JULIE AND NANCY FLINT-BUDDE HELD WERE POSITIONS THREE AND SEVEN.

SO GOOD NEWS IS THAT OUR CURRENT ALTERNATES MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THOSE POSITIONS.

THEY ARE THREE IS MEMBER OWNER AND HISTORIC DISTRICT.

YOU BOTH QUALIFY UNDER THAT AND THEN SEVEN IS ANY MEMBER OF THE CITY.

SO, YOU ALSO QUALIFY UNDER THOSE.

SO, WE EXPECT THAT THE TWO ALTERNATES WILL BE MOVED UP TO REGULAR MEMBERS AT THE NEXT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND HOPEFULLY THEY'LL HAVE SOME APPLICANTS THAT THEY CAN CHOOSE FROM FOR THE ALTERNATES.

OKAY. TO THE ALTERNATES.

WE ALSO HAVE A NEW EX OFFICIO, WHO IS BEAU ROLLINS.

HE IS A RECENTLY ELECTED MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL AND REPRESENTS DISTRICT FIVE, SO WE HOPE TO WELCOME HIM AT THE NEXT MEETING.

VERY GOOD. BE NICE TO BE ALL ORGANIZED.

YES, OKAY.

SURE. YES, ABSOLUTELY.

SO, THE ALTERNATE POSITIONS HAVE TO QUALIFY FOR POSITIONS ONE THROUGH FOUR, AND THAT IS GENERALLY MEMBERS PROPERTY OWNERS AND HISTORIC DISTRICT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT INCLUDES THE DOWNTOWN.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO PUT ON THE DISCUSSION? NO. OKAY. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.