Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

HOLD ON. GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME EVERYONE TO THIS REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION .

[Landmark Commission on May 19, 2025.]

[00:00:05]

TODAY IS MONDAY, MAY 19TH, 2025 AND THE TIME IS 4:00.

WE WILL START OUR MEETING OFF WITH ATTENDANCE.

COMMISSIONER ALLEN. PRESENT. VICE CHAIRPERSON BOURGEOIS.

PRESENT. COMMISSIONER CHASTAIN. PRESENT. CHAIRPERSON CLICK.

PRESENT. COMMISSIONER FITZ. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER LANGDALE WILL BE ABSENT.

COMMISSIONER SMITH WILL BE ABSENT. COMMISSIONER STETZEL-THOMPSON IS ABSENT.

COMMISSIONER THIERRY. PRESENT. EX-OFFICIO COUNCIL MEMBER SHARON LEWIS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. NEXT WE WILL MOVE ON TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST WITH OUR CASE TODAY? NO. NO. OKAY, MOVING ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY NON AGENDA ITEMS? NO STAFF. DID WE RECEIVE ANY OTHER. NO OKAY. OKAY.

MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC HEARINGS.

OUR FIRST CASE IS 25LC-013. A REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AT 1719 WINNIE.

ALRIGHTY. SO, AS STATED, THIS IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUEST FOR A REAR ADDITION, BASICALLY TO REBUILD AN EXISTING REAR ADDITION.

THERE WERE SIX PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, AND NONE OF THOSE WERE RETURNED.

SO IN 2020, JUST FOR A LITTLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION, THE APPLICANT OBTAINED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO THE NON-HISTORIC REAR ADDITION INCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL VINYL CLAD WINDOWS.

THAT WAS CASE 20LC- 053. BUT SINCE THAT APPROVAL, THE OWNER HAS DISCOVERED MORE SIGNIFICANT ISSUES WITH THIS ADDITION.

SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BASICALLY TO REBUILD THE ENTIRE, SAY, ENTIRE REAR ADDITION. IT'S NOT THAT BIG.

WE'LL SEE IN THE THE SLIDES HERE IN A MOMENT.

THE ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED IN THE 50S, 1956, EXPANDED IN 1989, ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT.

SO NOT HISTORIC. THE ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED APPROXIMATELY SIX INCHES BELOW THE FINISHED FLOOR OF THE MAIN HOUSE, WHICH HAS RESULTED IN NOT ONLY INCONVENIENCE BUT ALSO SOME DIFFERENTIAL MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO, WHICH IS NOW CAUSING PROBLEMS TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE AS WELL.

SO IN ORDER, INSTEAD OF REPAIRING THE ADDITION, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REBUILD IT.

YOU CAN NOTE ADDITIONAL DETAILS IN THE STAFF REPORT.

ALSO, PLEASE NOTE THE APPROPRIATE DESIGN STANDARDS.

SO STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST CONFORMS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES. THE ADDITION IS NOT HISTORIC, AND IT'S IN LOCATION DEEMED NOT TYPICALLY VISIBLE REAR FACADE.

BECAUSE THIS THE MAIN STRUCTURE IS SO CLOSE TO ITS NEIGHBORS, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY VISIBLE, IF AT ALL, FROM THE MAIN STREET. AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REUSE EXISTING DOORS AND WINDOWS, INCLUDING THE WINDOWS APPROVED UNDER 20 LC- 053.

SIGN AND TRIM WILL BE MILLED WOOD WITH A LOW PITCHED COMPOSITE ROOF, AND THE NEW ADDITION WILL ONLY DIFFER FROM THE EXISTING IN THE FACT IT WILL BE SIX INCHES HIGHER, SO THAT THE FINISHED FLOORS OF THE TWO LINE UP.

SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL REQUEST WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS ONE AND STANDARD CONDITIONS TWO THROUGH SIX OF THE STAFF REPORT.

WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS HERE. SO WE HAVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THERE ON THE LEFT SEEN FROM THE STREET.

AND ONCE AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE ADDITION IN ANY SIGNIFICANT WAY.

ALSO A SITE PLAN FROM THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS SHOWING WHERE THIS AREA TO BE DEMOLISHED AND REBUILT ACTUALLY IS.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE WE HAVE THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS FROM THE APPLICANT SUBMITTAL, AS WELL AS AN OBLIQUE MODEL OF THIS LITTLE ADDITION TO BE REBUILT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND HERE WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED SHOWING FIRST OF ALL, YOU CAN SEE THAT SIX INCH STEP DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ADDITION AND THE MAIN HOUSE THERE IN THE UPPER LEFT AND THEN MULTIPLE OTHER PHOTOS OF THE REAR FACADE OF THE MAIN HOUSE, SHOWING HOW THIS MOVEMENT IS STARTING TO CAUSE DAMAGE TO THE REAR HOUSE.

AND ALSO SOME PHOTOS OF THE FOUNDATION SHOWING HOW THAT MOVEMENT IS OCCURRING WITH THE EXTENSIVE REPAIRS WOULD NEED TO BE MADE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE ARE THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, TO THE EAST AND TO THE WEST.

AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT. THANK YOU DANIEL.

DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. OKAY. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 25LC-013.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE? WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP AND TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT? IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME FOR US AND SIGN IN ON THE PAPER UP THERE.

MY NAME IS. MY NAME IS MARCIA LUTZ AND I LIVE AT 1719 WINNIE AND DANIEL JUST DESCRIBED IT PRETTY WELL. THOSE PICTURES SHOW HOW POOR THE FOUNDATION IS, WHICH DROVE THIS PROJECT TO START WITH.

[00:05:09]

AND THEN AS LONG AS WE. WE CAN'T REALLY EVEN GET TO THAT TO REPAIR IT PROPERLY AFTER MEETING WITH MY CONTRACTOR.

SO TO AND IN ADDITION TO THOSE PROBLEMS THERE'S ROOF PROBLEMS. SO IT'S JUST BETTER TO THIS ADDITION WAS IT'S NOT EVEN A PERMANENT PART OF THE STRUCTURE WE DISCOVERED FIVE YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON IT.

IT WAS JUST ABUTTED AGAINST THE HOME. SO THEY'RE JUST PRESSED TOGETHER AND NOT DONE THAT WELL IN 59 OR 86 OR WHATEVER THOSE YEARS WERE IN THE 50S AND THE 80S.

SO I WANT TO MAKE IT RIGHT. AND I HAVE HIRED THIS CONTRACTOR THAT'S DONE A LOT OF WORK ON HISTORIC HOMES, AND WE ARE READY TO BEGIN. THANK YOU. DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? WE DID HAVE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS FROM THE CITY PERMIT AND ADDRESS THOSE.

SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT THOSE HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AND THEN IT CAME TO YOU? I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE PROCESS GOES. I'M NOT SURE.

SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, IF THERE IS A PERMIT SUBMITTED AND THEN STAFF DETERMINES OR HBO DETERMINES THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REVIEW IS REQUIRED, IT WILL STOP THE PERMIT UNTIL THAT'S RESOLVED.

BUT THE PERMIT ISN'T NECESSARILY LIKE CLOSED OR DENIED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO ONCE WE HAVE A RESOLUTION HERE, THEN THE APPLICANT CAN MOVE FORWARD IN SOME MANNER.

SO IT'S JUST A PAUSE BUTTON. YEAH. YEAH. OH OKAY.

OKAY. ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS PROJECT? THIS CASE? I DIDN'T FILL IN THE CASE NUMBER. I DIDN'T GET THAT.

IT'S 25LC-013. I'M SORRY 25LC.

OKAY, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK FOR A MOTION FROM THE COMMISSION.

I'LL MAKE ONE. I'LL MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CASE 25LC-013 PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

I'LL SECOND. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? NO. OKAY. WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? THOSE OPPOSED? OKAY, THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NEXT, WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ITEM ON WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION.

SO WE HAVE SOME INFORMATION THAT COMMISSIONER BOURGEOIS HAS GIVEN TO US FOR DISPLAY.

SO IT'LL JUST TAKE KARINA A MINUTE TO GET THAT UP ON THE SCREEN.

NO. LOOK, HE BROUGHT A JOURNAL.

[LAUGHTER] WHEN? DO I START TALKING, OR DO I WAIT? YEAH. GO AHEAD.

YEAH, WELL, THE REASON I BROUGHT THIS UP IS PEOPLE ALWAYS ASKING, YOU KNOW, TO PUT TWO OVER TWO WINDOWS IN, AND WE ALWAYS COME BACK SAYING, NO, YOU HAVE TO DO ONE OVER ONE. AND, YOU KNOW, I READ I READ OUR GUIDELINES AND EVERYTHING.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS THE REASON FOR THAT IS PEOPLE OR WE WANTED TO AS A CITY, MAKE IT SO YOU COULD BE A MODERN ADDITION.

AND AGAIN, I'M TALKING ABOUT I'M TALKING ABOUT MODERN CONSTRUCTION, NEW CONSTRUCTION, NOT REPLACING OLD WINDOWS.

BUT I ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT WAS KIND OF STRANGE BECAUSE NOWADAYS MODERN WINDOWS ARE TWO OVER TWO.

YOU SEE THEM A LOT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION. IT'S NOT LIKE IT WAS MAYBE 10, 20, 15 YEARS AGO WHERE IT WAS ALL ONE OVER ONE.

SO I LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES NEAR US OR IN TEXAS, AND I SAW SAN ANTONIO DOES THIS ALMOST A COMPLETE OPPOSITE.

AND THEY WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE WINDOWS SIMILAR TO THEIR HISTORIC WINDOWS, EVEN IN NEW CONSTRUCTION.

AND THIS IS JUST THEIR I THINK IT'S A THIRD PAGE TALKS ABOUT IT.

YOU WANT TO GO TO THAT. SO OR MAYBE FOR THIS KEEP ON GOING DOWN IT'LL BE A BIG THING SAYING NEW CONSTRUCTION.

I THINK ONE MORE. YEAH. SO YOU CAN SEE IF YOU READ IT.

IT TALKS ABOUT HOW THEY PREFER, LIKE I SAID, TO BE SIMILAR TO THE WINDOWS IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM US. AND I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT UP BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS ASKING FOR IT, AND I NECESSARILY I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T LIKE GIVING PEOPLE

[00:10:01]

GOING AGAINST OUR GUIDELINES, I GUESS FOR ONE OFFS OR RATHER, MAYBE TALK ABOUT CHANGING OUR GUIDELINES IF THAT'S EVEN FEASIBLE.

I DON'T KNOW THE PROCESS FOR THAT. SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.

CATHERINE YOU WANT TO JUMP IN HELP ME THROUGH IT? SURE. SO YES, ABSOLUTELY.

SO YOU'RE RIGHT IN THAT STAFF IT'S NOT REALLY SPECIFICALLY SPELLED OUT IN THE STANDARDS THAT WE PREFER ONE OVER ONE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.

IT'S THAT THIS IDEA THAT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THE ADDITION OR LOOK AT THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AND KNOW THAT IT'S NEW.

AND ONE OF THE WAYS THAT STAFF INTERPRETS THAT IS TO USE A MODERN WINDOW WITHOUT A DIVISION.

BUT IT'S CERTAINLY WE HAVE APPROVED IT IN THE PAST, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE CHANGED, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY STATED.

SO WHAT THE COMMISSION COULD DO IS A COUPLE OF THINGS YOU COULD JUST DO, LIKE A POLICY.

WE DID THAT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND WE ADOPTED THE CONSENT AGENDA POLICY.

SO IT WOULD JUST BE A POLICY STATEMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE OVER ONES ARE APPROPRIATE, BUT SO ARE TWO OVER TWOS OR WHATEVER IT IS THE COMMISSION DECIDES OR YOU COULD DO A CASE TO SPECIFICALLY CHANGE THE STANDARDS.

AND THE STANDARDS BELONG TO YOU ALL. YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THEM. AND WE DO DO THAT FROM TIME TO TIME. SO TODAY IT'S JUST A DISCUSSION ITEM.

IF THE COMMISSION'S RECEPTIVE TO THE IDEA, THEN WE WOULD PUT IT ON AS AN ACTION ITEM, AND THEN YOU WOULD DIRECT STAFF TO MAKE THE CHANGE, AND THEN WE'D BRING BACK THE CHANGE. SO IT'S A COUPLE OF STEPS.

ARE THE WINDOWS SOMETHING THAT WOULD MAKE A CASE COME TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AS OPPOSED TO BEING APPROVED BY STAFF AUTOMATICALLY? WELL, AUTOMATICALLY THE COMMISSION SEES ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION AND SEES ANY KIND OF REPLACEMENT WINDOW IF IT'S A CHANGE IN DESIGN OR MATERIAL.

OKAY, SO STAFF CAN APPROVE LIKE ONE ON THE REAR, A COUPLE ON THE SIDES.

BUT IF IT'S LIKE A FULL REPLACEMENT, WE ALWAYS BRING THAT TO THE COMMISSION.

WELL AGAIN I DON'T WANT TO DO REPLACEMENT WINDOWS IF CURRENT YOU KNOW THIS IS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION OR ADDITIONS.

SO IF IT'S JUST. MAKE SURE THAT.

DISCUSSION TO ALLOW A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY.

I MEAN, AND WHAT IS THE PROCESS AS FAR AS WHEN WE DO APPROVE? I MEAN, WE'RE GETTING PERMITS. WE'RE GETTING WE'RE DOCUMENTING LANDMARK COMMISSION LIKE WE KNOW IT'S NEW, TYPICALLY BECAUSE WE'VE APPROVED IT IN A PERMIT.

RIGHT. SO I THINK ALLOWING OR I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN REVISITING THE LANGUAGE IN THE ACTUAL DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY. BUT WERE YOU STATING THAT OUR STANDARDS DON'T SPECIFICALLY CALL FOR ONE OVER ONE? WE JUST SAY THAT IT NEEDS TO BE OBVIOUS THAT IT'S NEW, RIGHT? SO IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE A PRESERVATION PRINCIPLE THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD LOOK LIKE IT'S NEW, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO SPECIFICALLY, SAY, USE ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS.

THAT'S STAFF'S INTERPRETATION AND OUR STANDARD POLICY.

SO IT CAN BE CHANGED. AND LIKE I SAID I THINK TO GO WITH THAT IS MODERN WINDOWS NOWADAYS ARE TWO OVER TWO.

IT'S NOT LIKE IT WAS I THINK WHEN IT WAS 2003.

I THINK I READ WHEN IT WAS DONE, BECAUSE YOU CAN EVEN LOOK DRIVING THROUGH MONT BELVIEU NOW OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH IS KIND OF FAR FOR ALL OF Y'ALL. BUT I GO THERE A LOT FOR WORK, AND THERE'S TWO OVER TWO EVERYWHERE ON ALL THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.

YEAH, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF IMPROVEMENT IN WINDOWS AND ESPECIALLY WINDOWS THAT HAVE A SIMULATED DIVIDED LIGHT.

YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THEY CAN LOOK PRETTY AUTHENTIC.

WELL, THAT'S THAT'S ANOTHER THING. CAN WE OR WOULD WE EVEN WANT TO DO SIMULATED VERSUS REAL DIVIDED OR IS THAT EVEN MATTER FOR THE COMMISSION.

WELL FOR BECAUSE IT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION, YOU WOULD NEED TO HAVE AN IMPACT RESISTANT WINDOW.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN REALLY DO. I'VE HEARD THAT YOU CAN'T DO A TRUE DIVIDED LIGHT AND BE IMPACT RESISTANT.

SO REALLY SIMULATED IS THE ONLY OPTION. SO HOW DO WE KNOW IF WE'RE RECEPTIVE TO LIKE MAKING A POLICY OR CHANGING. WELL I'M NOT HEARING ANY NEGATIVITY FROM THE COMMISSION.

RIGHT. SO I FEEL LIKE THERE MIGHT BE THERE'S NOT BEEN ANY NEGATIVE POSITION PRESENTED.

SO WE CAN PUT THIS ON IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO AS AN ACTION ITEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA.

OKAY. AND WE'LL SEND THIS INFORMATION OUT AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT CHRISTIAN YOU HAVE, YOU CAN SEND TO ME AND WE'LL SEND OUT TO MAKE SURE THE COMMISSION CAN LOOK AT IT BEFOREHAND. OKAY. DO WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH THE LANGUAGE OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT STAFF.

NO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF WOULD DO OR DONNA.

OKAY? YEAH. THAT'S WHAT WE DO. WE READ AND INTERPRET AND WRITE CODE.

OKAY. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE AN OPINION? I DON'T WANT TO DRIVE THIS, YOU KNOW, SINGLY. YEAH.

I'M IMPRESSED. WE'RE LETTING YOU DO THAT. IT'S GOOD.

YEAH. OKAY. SO WE'LL PUT ON AN ACTION ITEM. AND THE ACTION ITEM WILL BE TO INSTRUCT STAFF TO MAKE THE CHANGE.

SO IT WON'T BE THE ACTUAL CHANGE YET. IT'S JUST AUTHORIZING US TO MAKE THE CHANGE.

[00:15:05]

SO IT'LL BE ANOTHER MEETING OR TWO UNTIL YOU SEE SOME ACTUAL LANGUAGE.

OKAY. FEEL GOOD ABOUT THAT. GOOD. IS IT A CHANGE? I MEAN, I GUESS I'M I NEED TO RELOOK AT THE LANGUAGE ON THERE, BUT IF IS IT CHANGE IN INTERPRETATION.

CHANGE OF INTERPRETATION. AND WE WOULD DOCUMENT THAT.

DOCUMENT IT IN A POLICY STATEMENT. OKAY. THANKS.

I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. I KNOW I HAVE WHERE DO WE HAVE A LIST OF POLICY STATEMENTS WE HAVE MADE IN THE PAST? WE'VE ONLY REALLY, IN MY MEMORY DONE ONE. AND THAT'S THE CONSENT AGENDA.

OKAY. I DIDN'T KNOW BECAUSE IT'S NOT IT'S NOT ON OUR THE PDF THAT'S 200 PAGE PDF THAT WE HAVE.

SO RIGHT. THOSE AREN'T THE ACTUAL CHANGES TO THE STANDARDS ARE DOCUMENTED AT THE END OF THE PDF DOCUMENT.

OKAY. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE'RE NOT TALKING SOLELY A POLICY STATEMENT.

WE'RE TALKING A CHANGE TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

OR ARE WE NOT? PROBABLY NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY STATED IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

IT'S BEEN STAFF'S INTERPRETATION. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO DISCUSS ANY MORE ABOUT WINDOWS? NO. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE AGENDA FOR OUR NEXT MEETING, WHICH IS MONDAY, JUNE 2ND? JUST. NO. HANG ON.

THERE'S A BIG CASELOAD. OH. BUT WE'RE GOING TO REINSTITUTE THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH WE HAVEN'T SEEN IN A WHILE, SO THAT'LL BE GOOD. THAT'S MORE ANXIETY. OKAY.

THE TIME IS NOW 4:16 AND T HE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.