[00:00:03]
[1. Opening of Meeting with Roll Call]
CALL, DO YOU HAVE THE THANK YOU.CAN WE PLEASE HAVE A LITTLE CERTAINLY DR.
SANDY'S BISBEE JOHN BLACK FOLDER HERE.
PEGGY BROADWAY, TONY BRYANT HERE, AND THEN STONE, CANDICE SOLVENT AND ELLEN SHERIDAN IS EXCUSED.
[2. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting(s)]
A MOTION RELATED TO THE TWO SETS OF MINUTES, UH, THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US? SO WE HAVE THE MINUTES FROM THE SEPTEMBER 15TH MEETING AND WE HAVE THE MINUTES FROM THE OCTOBER, UH, SIX MINUTES.CAN I CA CAN I CALL FOR A MOTION TO SUSPENSE FROM THE READING OF THE MINUTES? SO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
ALL OF THOSE, UH, GAS HEARING NONE.
WE WILL DISPENSE WITH THE READING OF THE MINUTES.
LET ME, UH, START WITH TALKING ABOUT THE HEARING AND HOW WE MET YOU.
DO YOU NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE OR ADOPT THE MINUTES? OKAY.
SO ADJUSTMENTS TO THE MINUTES.
ARE THERE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO EITHER ONE OF THESE TWO MINUTES HEARING, NOT A CALLAWAY OR PUTTING THESE TOGETHER OR DO WE NEED APPROVE EACH ONE OF THEM INDIVIDUALLY? YOU CAN DO.
THERE'S NO RECOMMENDATION FOR CHANGES.
YES DO SO WE WILL DO THEM TOGETHER.
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS MUCH? SEVEN MINUTE SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
THESE TWO SETS OF MINUTES OR APPROVED.
SO, UH, LET ME TALK ABOUT HOW,
[3.A. Hearings: Introduction, Swearing-In, Summary of Process]
WHAT THE COMMISSION IS AND HOW WE WILL PROCEED.HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IS A PUBLIC COMMISSION APPOINTED BY THE CITY OF NEWBURGH BOARD OF ALL OF THEM.
IT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR A PER SERVING AND SAVED CARD NEWBORNS LOCALLY, DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT DOWNTOWN AND RIVERSIDE BASED ON US DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR STANDARDS, STATE STATUTES, CITY ORDINANCES, AND NEW BRUNCH, HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
TWO ARE THE MAJOR TASKS WITH HPC INCLUDE APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND PREVENTING DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES DUE TO NEGLECT THE HPC.
HALL'S A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING ON AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THE COMMISSION HERE IS SWORN TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICA BY PARTIES WHO RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE HEARING AND BY OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAVE RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE APPLICATION.
THE COMMISSION CANNOT CONSIDER COMMENTS BASED ON PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES, HEARSAY OR PERSONAL OPINION THAT CANNOT BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO SPECIFIC HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
LIKEWISE, COMMISSIONER SHALL REFRAIN FROM STATING PERSONAL OPINION, PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES OR HEARSAY DURING A HEARING THE COMMISSION'S DECISION ON THE APPLICATION IS BASED SOLELY ON TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THE HEARING THAT DIRECTLY RELATES TO THE STORK GUIDELINES.
THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR MEETING TONIGHT, IF YOU WILL CALL THEM UP AND BEING SWORN IN.
AND DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE ALREADY ASSIGNED? DID HE SIGN IT MY BALLS ON END? OKAY.
THE HBC ADMINISTRATOR PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT, OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE PRESENTS THE APPLICATION PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WHO RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE HEARING CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.
REBUTTAL IS ALLOWED BY THE APPLICANT AND BY PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WHO RECEIVED NOTICE OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY
[00:05:01]
HAVE RELEVANT INFORMATION AND WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED, CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.THE HBC ADMINISTRATOR PRESENTS THE STAFF'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO MAKE FINAL COMMENTS.
IF THEY DESIRE THE COMMISSIONERS, DISCUSS THE EVIDENCE AND MAY ASK FOR CLARIFICATION FROM THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE, THE CHAIRMAN CALLS FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE OR DENY THE APPLICATION WAS STATED.
FINDING THE FACT THE MOTION IS DISCUSSED BY THE COMMISSION, THE CHAIRMAN CALLS FOR A VOTE ON THE MOTION BY THE COMMISSION.
A COA CAN BE APPROVED, APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS OR DENIED.
SO LET US GO TO THE FIRST APPLICATION
[3.B. 715 E. Front Street – to include demolition of a contributing structure]
ON OUR SET OF MINUTES FOR THIS EVENING.AND THAT IS SEVEN 15 EAST FRONT STREET.
SO IF YOU WANT TO GIVE US A OH, TO, UH, UM, ASK ABOUT CONFLICTS.
ARE THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST FOR THIS FIRST ITEM? SEVEN 15 EAST FRONT STREET.
ANYBODY NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES? I DO.
SO ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF HER RECUSING HERSELF, WE NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND.
SO CAN WE HAVE A MOTION FOR HER TO RECUSE HERSELF? YOU HAVE A SECOND.
SO IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A SEAT OUT THERE FOR THIS DISCUSSION, YOU HAVE TO GO THIS WAY.
SO SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL US ABOUT THIS FIRST APPLICATION? CERTAINLY.
UM, SO THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF THE APPLICATION HERE FOR SEVEN 15 EAST FRONT STREET, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS, ROSALIE MCDEVITT, UH, AND THE APPLICANTS, UH, NAME IS GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PLLC.
SARAH BACH IS THE OWNER'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
UM, THE APPLICATION IS FOR THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, UH, TO ACCOMMODATE A NEW HOUSE AND THE PREFERENCE DEMOLITION SECTIONS.
AND, UM, ALSO, UH, THAT THERE ARE NO THAT MATERIALS ARE NOT APPLICABLE.
SO THAT APPLICATION IS SIGNED BY SARAH LUBBOCK AND DATED.
AND THIS IS THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION FORM SIGNED AND DATED AND NOTARIZED.
AND SO NOW YOUR VIEW OF THE SITE PLAN.
SO THIS IS THE SITE INDICATED HERE AT INSIDE THE BLUE LINE.
UH, THE, UH, EAST FRONT STREET IS THAT THE TOP OF THE DRAWING, UH, AND IT ACTUALLY SHOWS TWO HOUSES.
UM, INSIDE THE BLUE LINE, THE PARCEL IS ACTUALLY THE LEFT HALF OF THIS.
UH, W THE TWO PARCELS WERE OWNED BY THE SAME OWNER AT ONE POINT.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THESE ARE INSIDE ONE, A RECTANGLE, BUT IT'S JUST THE LEFT HALF.
SO YOU SEE THE LEFT HALF HAS A, IN THE LOWER LEFT CORNER, HAS THE SUBJECT BUILDING.
UM, AND THEN ALSO A LARGE OPEN SPACE IN FRONT OF IT, UP TO THE, UM, DASH DEN AREA AND INCLUDING THE DASH-IN AREA, WHICH IS, UH, JUST THE OLD DRIVEWAY THAT WAS THERE.
UM, AND SO ESSENTIALLY YOU WOULD IGNORE THE RIGHT HALF OF THIS SECOND OF THIS, UH, RECTANGULAR AREA.
UM, I GUESS, UH, TWO THINGS TO NOTE HERE ARE THE DIMENSIONS TO THE PROPERTY LINES AND THE LOWER LEFT CORNER.
AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE IF HE CAN READ THAT, UH, AND AT THE RISK OF LOSING IT, UH, 13.6 FEET TO THE BUILDING AT IT'S CLOSEST TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE SIDE AND 14 FEET TO A LITTLE TINY LITTLE PROJECTION ON THE BACK, UH, TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, UH, THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ABOUT, OR IS DIMENSIONED TO SHOW 101 FEET TO THE FRONT PROPERTY
[00:10:01]
LINE.SO THE APPLICANT, UM, ALSO INCLUDES A PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, THEY HAVE, UH, IT'S UNDER CONTRACT, I BELIEVE.
AND SO, UH, HIS NAME IS GEORGE AIKEN.
HE'S ALSO A PROFESSIONAL STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.
AND SO HE'S PROVIDED FOR HIMSELF, UH, THE A S UH, AN ASSESSMENT OF THE STRUCTURE.
UH, I'M NOT GOING TO READ ALL THAT.
UM, HOWEVER HE DOES REFERENCE, YOU CAN SEE IN THE BOWL THERE, HE DOES REFERENCE, UH, ALL THE FIGURES, UH, ONE THROUGH 30.
AND HE ALSO DOES, UH, ANSWER, UH, MANY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE PROCESS, UH, WHICH I CAN GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH, UH, FOR EVALUATING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE FOR DEMOLITION THERE'S THESE 1, 2, 3, UH, THIS ONE IS THE HPC IS TO DETERMINE THE STRUCTURE QUALIFIES AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN A LOCALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND IT IS 50 YEARS OR OLDER OR NOT TO, UH, THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE SHIPPO HAS DETERMINED WHETHER THE STRUCTURE HAS STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE OR NOT.
AND THREE, UH, SHIPPO HAS EVALUATED THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR OF THE STRUCTURE AND PROVIDED WRITTEN EVALUATION AND OPINION ON THE ARCHITECTURAL, HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO, UH, WITH REGARD TO, UM, NUMBER ONE, THAT WILL BE ONE THING FOR YOU TO DETERMINE NUMBER TWO AND THREE.
THE SHIPO OFFICE HAS, UH, PROVIDED US, UH, SEVERAL EMAILS TO ADDRESS THOSE AS WELL.
AND THEN CONTINUING ON, UM, OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT THE IS TO USE FOR EVALUATION REGARDING A DEMOLITION CONSIDERATIONS.
YOU CAN SEE ONE, TWO AND THREE HERE.
SO CONSIDERATION ONE IS THREE BULLETS.
UM, IS IT A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE? THE APPLICANT SAYS, YES, ALTHOUGH GIVEN THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE STRUCTURED IS NOT CONSIDERED VIABLE BY THE HPC GUIDELINES DEFINITIONS, UH, WHICH HAS, UH, UH, LISTED AS FEASIBLE, WORKABLE, AND PRACTICAL TO, IS IT SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE OF ITS HISTORIC USE AND EVENT, THE PERSON, A BUILDER OR AN ARCHITECT, UH, APPLICANT HAS REPLIED? NO, IT IS NOT BELIEVE THAT THE HOUSE IS ASSOCIATED WITH ANY HISTORIC EVENT PERSON, BUILDER OR ARCHITECT, AND THIRD BULLET.
IS IT THE LAST OR OLDEST EXAMPLE OF A CERTAIN BUILDING TYPE THEY'VE ANSWERED? NO, THERE IT, UH, I GUESS IT IS BELIEVED THAT THERE ARE NUMEROUS, UH, 1950S VINTAGE STRUCTURES IN THE AREA.
IT IS UNKNOWN IF THIS TYPE OF ARCHITECTURE IS SCARCE OR UNIQUE CONSIDERATION TO IS TO ADDRESS THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO THERE ARE TWO BULLETS HERE.
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS OF FOUNDATIONS, FOURS, WALLS, WINDOWS, DOORS, AND ROOFS.
THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS A SINGLE STORY.
CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT SHELL THAT IS DILAPIDATED AND UNINHABITABLE.
THERE IS NO ROOF, NO WINDOWS, NO ELECTRICITY, NO PLUMBING, NO HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING, NOR KITCHEN, THE INTERIOR FLOOR, JOISTS FLOOR SHEATHING, AND A FEW REMAINING CEILING JOISTS HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO THE WEATHER FOR THREE YEARS AND ARE DETERIORATED AND UNSTABLE.
SECOND BULLET, UH, IS IT A HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE? THE APPLICANTS REPLIED REMAINING CEILING JOYS FLOOR.
JOYCE IMPLORE SHEETING HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO THE ELEMENTS THREE YEARS AND ARE DETERIORATED AND UNSTABLE.
AND THEN CONSIDERATION THREE RE BULLETS HERE, UM, HAVE OPTIONS FOR REHABILITATION BEEN EXPLORED WITH PRESERVATION ORGANIZATIONS.
SO, UM, JUST SUMMARIZE THIS ESSENTIALLY, THEY'VE SAID THAT, UM, UH, DUE TO THE
UM, SECOND BULLET HAS THE APPLICANT BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN SEEKING ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION? THE ANSWER THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS EXPLORED THE TWO OPTIONS DESCRIBED ABOVE, UH, THE PROPERTY PROPOSED PROPERTY OWNER HAS EXPLORED REPURPOSING THE STRUCTURE, BUT NO OPTIONS ARE VIABLE.
AND THIRD BULLET HAVE ALTERNATIVES FOR STRUCTURAL RELOCATION AND SALE OF THE PROPERTY BEEN PURSUED.
SO THEIR ANSWER IS SIMILAR TO LIFTING OR RAISING THE STRUCTURE UNDERPINNING AND MOVING A CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT STRUCTURE IS PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE AND BEYOND THE SCOPE OF A RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION.
AND THEN I'M SORRY THAT, YEAH.
SO NOW AS THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING REPORT, UM, WHILE THAT'S NOT REQUIRED, UH, THEY HAVE DONE SO ANYWAY, UH, GIVING A REPORT ON THE ROOF AND CEILING, THE INTERIOR WALLS,
[00:15:01]
THE WINDOWS, EXTRA DOORS, THE FLOOR, THE EXTERIOR FOUNDATIONS AND WALLS, AND THEN ALSO A DETAILED DESCRIPTION JUSTIFICATION FOR EACH STRUCTURE COMPONENT OF WHETHER THE COMPONENT IS 50% OR MORE STRUCTURALLY UNSOUND, AGAIN, ROOF AND CEILING INTERIOR WALLS, WINDOWS FLOORS, EXTERIOR DOOR, AND EXTERIOR WALLS AND FOUNDATIONS.SO, AND, UH, IN HIS OPINION, THE ONLY PART OF THE INSTITUTE'S STRUCTURE THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE REPURPOSED AS THE EXTERIOR SECURITY WALLS, ESSENTIALLY THE SHELL, THESE WALLS APPEAR TO BE IN SERVICEABLE CONDITION, BUT STRENGTHENING OF LENTILS OR SPANNING OF THE OPENINGS PRIOR TO PLACING LOADING WOULD BE PROVEN.
IT'S BELIEVED THAT THE WALL IS NOT REINFORCED EITHER VERTICALLY OR HORIZONTALLY SINCE THIS WAS NOT COMMON IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, PROTECTING THE EXISTING CMU WALL WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT AND DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION WOULD BE PAINSTAKINGLY DONE BY HAND AND IMMENSELY EXPENSIVE, MUCH DIFFICULT.
IT COULD BE ANTICIPATED IN DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING WOOD FLOOR, SUB FLOOR JOISTS AND BEAMS, EMPTY PEERS PLACING ANY NEW CONCRETE OR WOOD FLOOR WOULD ALSO BE EXTREMELY TIME CONSUMING AND REQUIRE DILIGENT CARE TO BE TAKEN, TO PROTECT THE CMU WALLS.
MOREOVER, ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION ON THE 70 YEAR OLD CMU UNITS WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE COMPLIANT WITH EXISTING BUILDING CODES.
IT WOULD BE ESPECIALLY CHALLENGING TO MEET THE MODERN BUILDING CODE FOR HIGH WIND AND ROOF TIE DOWN.
EACH OF THESE FACTORS SPEAK TO THE VIABILITY, FEASIBILITY, WORKABILITY, AND PRACTICALITY OF ANY SCHEME TO REPURPOSE THE WALLS.
AND SO THEY'VE PROVIDED, UH, 30, UH, DIFFERENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE STRUCTURE.
SO THIS BEING A GOOD OVERVIEW, UM, SHOWING THE STRUCTURE AND ITS CURRENT SITUATION, THE ENTIRE ROOF HAS GONE.
UH, HALF OF THE CEILING JOISTS ARE GONE AND WE'LL SEE MORE DETAILS.
UM, ALL THE WINDOWS ARE, ARE NOT IN PLACE, ALTHOUGH I UNDERSTAND IN STORAGE.
UM, AND THEN AGAIN FROM THE OTHER ANGLE FROM THE BACK AND NOW FROM DIRECTLY ABOVE AND NOW FROM, FROM, UH, NOW A WHOLE SERIES OF INTERIOR PHOTOGRAPHS, UM, UH, SHOWING THE CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE.
I THINK THE PICTURES SPEAK A THOUSAND WORDS.
UH, THE SHOWING ONE OF THE FEW SHOTS SHOWING THAT THE, UM, PIECE OF THE FLOOR REMOVED OR MISSING, UH, AND, UH, THE SHALLOW NATURE OF THE CRAWLSPACE UNDERNEATH.
OKAY, NOW WE HAVE DIFFERENT SIGNS FOR THE, PERHAPS THERE WE GO.
UM, UH, THIS IS ALSO AT THAT OPENING OR ONE OF THE OPENINGS TO THE CRAWLSPACE AND SHOWING THIS FOR STRUCTURE AND THE FLOOR SURFACE PLYWOOD.
SO, UM, THIS MUST BE FROM INSIDE THE ADDITION ON THE BACK, UM, THROUGH THE DOORWAY, INTO THE MAIN HOUSE, SHOWING THE FRONT, UH, FRONT DOOR WAY FROM THE INSIDE AND THEN VICE VERSA FROM THE DOORWAY AT THE SEAMS, UH, BACK TO THE DOORWAY AT THE, UM, ADDITION ON THE BANK.
AND AGAIN, JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THE LEFT, THAT'S THAT SAME DOORWAY.
AND THEN AGAIN, NOW HERE AS THE CRAWL SPACE, A LITTLE BIT AT AN ANGLE, UM, SO YOU MAY HAVE TO TWIST YOUR HEAD A LITTLE BIT TO THE LEFT.
UM, BUT THE GROUND IS WHAT 6, 10, 12 INCHES BELOW THE JOISTS.
UM, AGAIN, UH, AND, UM, CROSS BRACING WAS CROSS BRACING.
OH, I GUESS, UM, THE, UH, CONCRETE BLOCKS OR EIGHT INCHES HIGH.
SO IT MAY BE 16 INCHES CRAWLSPACE THERE.
AND THEY'VE ALSO MARKED, UH, MANY OF THE CRACKS THAT ARE IN THE EXISTING WALL WITH THE RED, UH, PAINT, OR I GUESS MAYBE A DRAWING ON THE DRAWING ON THAT SHORT AND THERE, YOU CAN SEE A CRACK OVER THE LINTEL ON THE FRONT WINDOW
[00:20:01]
AND ANOTHER ONE OVER ANOTHER LENTIL.UH, THERE'S ACTUALLY A STEEL, UH, STEEL LINTEL BEHIND HERE.
IF YOU CAN MAYBE SEE THAT IT'S A SMALL AREA HERE BECAUSE, UM, THOSE THAT STEEL UNTIL THEN HOLDS UP THESE INDIVIDUAL CONCRETE BLOCKS HERE.
HERE'S ANOTHER LINTEL WITH MORE CRACKS.
UM, THIS IS A HAIRLINE CRACK NEXT TO THE ONE WINDOW SILL.
SO ANOTHER ONE WITH A SIMILAR PATTERN AND ANOTHER ONE WITH ANOTHER SIMILAR PATTERN.
SO THESE WERE ALL RAN AT THE WINDOW, SILLS THAT KIND OF, UH, HIS EXACT THERE.
AND THEN THIS CONTINUES DOWN BELOW THE WINDOW SILL AND ANOTHER ONE, UH, OVER A WINDOW, A LENTIL, THERE WAS ONE AT THE TOP OF THE WALL, ANOTHER END OF LINTEL.
THIS ONE DOESN'T HAVE ANY, UM, THE FRONT DOOR.
AND NOW THE, UH, UH, SITE PLAN SHOWING A POTENTIAL PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE EXISTING BUILDING TO THAT REDEVELOPMENT.
SO LET WANT GET THIS QUITE A BIT LARGER.
SO WE'LL START AT LEAST WITH A LITTLE BIT OF AN OVERVIEW HERE AGAIN, THE STREET EAST FRONT STREET AT THE TOP.
UM, AND THEY'RE PROPOSING WITH THIS BLUE SHAPE HERE, A, A NEW HOME, UH, AND THEN THERE'S, THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING THAT THEY WOULD THAT AFTER DEMOLITION, THEY WOULD, UM, ADD A GARAGE IN THE BACK.
AND WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING HERE IS THAT THE, UM, THE CURVE RADIUS REQUIRED FOR A VEHICLE TO ENTER A GARAGE.
UM, UH, ACTUALLY REQUIRES A DISTANCE, UH, FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE TO THE GARAGE DOOR THAT IS LARGER THAN THE AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT'S AVAILABLE CURRENTLY WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING.
SO TO CONSIDER, UH, PUTTING, CONVERTING THIS EXISTING BUILDING INTO A GARAGE, UH, IS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ENOUGH SPACE FOR A CAR TO TURN IN THE SIDE OF THE, OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO, UM, BIGGER PICTURE, JUST ENLARGE IT A LITTLE BIT IN CASE YOU COULDN'T SEE BEFORE YOU SEE THE BLUE SQUARE HERE WOULD BE THE NEW GARAGE AND THEY ALSO SHOW THE, UM, SETBACKS REQUIRED FOR A NEW HOUSE AND A NEW GARAGE, ACTUALLY THE GARAGE CONNECTION IN THE BACK, TWO MORE FEET FOR THREE FOOT SETBACK.
THE NEXT ONE IS, UH, AN EXAMPLE OF A HOUSE THAT WOULD FIT ON THE PROPERTY IN THAT FOOTPRINT.
UM, THIS IS JUST ONE THAT WAS PULLED OFF THE INTERNET, BUT JUST TO SHOW THAT IT IS AT THIS POINT, UM, NOT IMPOSSIBLE, UH, BECAUSE THAT HOUSE IS, HAS THE DIMENSION OF, UM, WHERE WAS THE DIMENSION ON THIS? DID WE LOSE THAT PAGE? OH, NO, I THINK, UH, DID YOU GUYS REMOVE THE PAGE WITH THE DIMENSIONS? OKAY.
SO IT DOESN'T HAVE DIMENSIONS ON HERE, BUT THIS IS A TWO SCALE RENDITION OF THAT FLOOR PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY.
SO YOU CAN SEE, UH, THE POINT BEING THAT, UM, THERE IS STILL SPACE, UH, ON THIS, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE TO GET A CAR ENOUGH SPACE TO DRIVE BY, UH, BEFORE, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT, UM, CROSSING THE PROPERTY LINE.
UM, AND THEN, SO, UM, THIS WAS NOW ONE OF THE FIRST OF THREE EMAILS FROM THE SHIPPO REGARDING THE TWO REQUIREMENTS, UM, IN OUR POLICY PROCEDURES FOR DEMOLITIONS.
SO FIRST OF THE TWO IS THAT SHIPPO HAS TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE DESTRUCTOR HAS STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE AND SECONDLY, SHIPPO HAS EVALUATED
[00:25:01]
THE INTERIM, EXTRA THE STRUCTURE AND PROVIDED A WRITTEN EVALUATION AND OPINION ON THE ARCHITECTURAL HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STRUCTURE.SO FIRST THE WERE TWO EMAILS ABOUT THE FIRST OP THE FIRST ITEM, UM, AND QUITE CLEARLY, UM, HE SAYS THAT, UH, THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF BEING OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE.
AND THEN WHEN I ASKED HIM TO REPLY ABOUT THE SECOND ONE, HE CONTINUED ABOUT THE FIRST ONE.
UM, SO I THINK THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING.
AND THEN FINALLY, UM, I WAS ABLE TO GET HIM TO RESPOND TO THE SECOND ONE.
AND HE HAS THESE SIX BULLET ITEMS, BASICALLY THAT DESCRIBE WHY THIS HOUSE WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED, OR IS CONSIDERED TO BE CONTRIBUTING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO, FIRST OF ALL, UH, FIRST ONE IS THAT FIRST OF ALL, HAS TO BE IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH IT IS, UM, ALSO THAT THE HOUSE WAS BUILT WITHIN THE, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICTS PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE, WHICH WAS, UH, UP TO 1953.
AND THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN APPROXIMATELY 1950, UH, AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY, WHICH IS WHAT THE TERM FOR IS FOR WHEN THEY, UM, REVIEWED THE HOUSE, UH, BACK IN 2002 OR THREE, THE HOUSE RETAINED HISTORIC INTEGRITY.
UH, THE HOUSE IS PART OF A HISTORIC STREETSCAPE OF THE NORTHERN END, A PIECE FRONT STREET, UH, FIFTH LANE.
THE HOUSE IS REPRESENTATIVE OF NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA IN A, IN THE AREA OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT UNDER CRITERIA.
AND A HOUSE IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE POST-WORLD WAR II HOUSING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED IN NEW BERN IN THE DECADE, FOLLOWING THE WAR.
IT IS A PART, IT IS PART OF THE CONTINUED DEVELOP MENT OR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTHERN END OF EAST FRONT STREET, WHERE OLDER, RESIDENTIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL STRUCTURES WERE DEMOLISHED.
AND THE LOTS REBUILT UPON IT ALSO MAY INDICATE ONE FAMILY'S MEANS OF CREATING ADDITIONAL INCOME THROUGH RENTAL PROPERTY.
AS THEY ALSO CONSTRUCTED TWO HOUSES ON THE ADJACENT LOT AT SEVEN 11 EAST FRONT STREET THAT'S WAS THE RIGHT HAND, HALF OF THAT BLUE RECTANGLE AT THE VERY BEGINNING, SO THAT, UH, LASTLY, THIS THE HOUSE HAS REPRESENTATIVE NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA AND SEE FOR ARCHITECTURE AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE SIMPLE, MODEST HOUSE STYLES AND FORMS BEING CONSTRUCTED IN NEWBURN IN THE DECADE.
FOLLOWING THE SECOND WORLD WAR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS REPRESENT THE POPULAR MATERIALS AND METHODS IN USE DURING THE PERIOD, THE STYLE FORM AND MATERIALS MAY ALSO BE INDICATIVE OF THE FUNCTION SLASH OCCUPANTS OF THE HOUSE, SUCH AS RENTAL HOUSING FOR TENANT OCCUPANCY.
UH, AND I FORGOT TO MENTION IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, UH, THE SECOND SENTENCE, UH, SAYS FOR THE MOST PART, IF A PROPERTY FALLS WITHIN THE DISTRICT'S PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE, RETAINS HISTORIC INTEGRITY, AND IS REPRESENTATIVE OF ONE OF THE NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA FOR WHICH THE DISTRICT IS BEING NOMINATED, THEN IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE CONTRIBUTING TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UH, HE THEN WENT ON TO SAY THAT, UH, IF YOU NEED ANY MORE, UM, INFORMATION OR HELP ON THE SIGNIFICANCE, UH, HE RECOMMENDS THAT WE ENGAGE A CONSULTANT FOR THAT.
AND WHILE IT APPEARS THAT THE HPC HAS ENOUGH INFORMATION TO RENDER A DECISION, THE MORE INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE, THE BETTER THE DECISION WILL BE, I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO YOU AND THEM TO DECIDE THEM, MEANING YOU, UH, TO DECIDE IF THEY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND NEEDS ATTACHED TO LIST OF SUCH CONSULTANTS.
ALL RIGHT, THEN, UH, ONE MORE, UH, PIECE OF OUTSIDE INFORMATION IS THE, UM, UH, UH, PROCEDURES AND THE MANUAL ALSO RE UH, REQUIRE THAT THE HPC MEMBERS VISIT THE SITE.
AND IF THE STRUCTURE IS UNSAFE, THAT THE, UH, CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR, UM, PROVIDE, UH, INFORMATION ABOUT THE STRUCTURE SO THAT YOU ALL DON'T HAVE TO GO INSIDE AND DO THAT.
UH, HE RECENTLY VISITED THE PROPERTY TO ASSESS THE VIABILITY OF RENOVATING THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO MEET ALL APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES WHILE ALSO COMPLYING WITH THE CITY'S FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION ORDINANCE.
AND I'M JUST GOING TO READ THE NEXT FEW PARAGRAPHS BECAUSE, UM, I BELIEVE WE ALL RECEIVED THIS JUST TODAY.
SO YOU MAY NOT HAVE, HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT YOURSELVES YET.
ALL FRAMING MEMBERS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO THE ELEMENTS WILL NEED TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED.
ALL ELECTRICAL PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ARE ALSO INOPERABLE AND WOULD NEED TO BE FULLY REMOVED AND REPLACED.
[00:30:02]
IT APPEARS THAT THE ONLY PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE THAT IS SALVAGEABLE ARE THE UNREINFORCED UNINSULATED BLOCK WALLS RAISING THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION TO ABOVE THE CURRENT FEMA FLOOD LEVELS WOULD BE IMPRACTICAL AND COST PROHIBITIVE, UH, ATTEMPTING TO SUCCESSFULLY ELEVATE THE ENTIRE MASONRY SHELL WOULD SURELY LEAD TO ADDITIONAL CRACKING AND DAMAGES.AND THAT'S MATT BOSWELL, THE CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR.
LASTLY, UM, BEFORE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, WE HAVE THE ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REVIEW, AND THE ZONING OFFICER SAID THAT A DEMOLITION IS NOT APPLICABLE FOR ZONING.
AND THAT, UH, THE TWO BUILDING INSPECTOR DID SAY THAT A DEMOLITION PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED.
SO OTHER THAN THAT, DOES THE AFRICAN OR THE REPRESENTATIVE WISH TO ADD ANYTHING TO WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED? SARAH,
I KNOW THAT YOU ALL ARE ALL VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROJECT AND HAVE SEEN IT COME THROUGH SEVERAL TIMES IN ATTEMPT TO RAISE IT.
AND HERE WE ARE AT THIS STAGE WHERE WE THINK THAT THE MOST VIABLE OPTION FOR THIS LOT REALLY IS TO TAKE IT DOWN.
AND, YOU KNOW, MATT, WHAT MATT BOSWELL SAID AT THE VERY END IS REALLY HOW WE SEE THE PROPERTY AND THAT IT'S A SHELL.
IT'S NOT, UM, REALLY REPRESENTATIVE OF THE HISTORIC CHARACTER THAT IT ONCE HAD AND IN HAVING TO RAISE IT, TO MAKE IT A VIABLE PROPERTY TAKES AWAY THAT CHARACTER AND MAKES IT REALLY COST PROHIBITIVE.
AND I KNOW COST IS NOT A CONCERN FOR YOU, BUT IT, TO ME, IT GOES TOWARDS THE VIABILITY OF THE PROJECT ITSELF.
SO JUST WANT TO SAY THOSE WORDS.
SO DO WE HAVE ANY NOTIFIED PROPONENTS IN OUR AUDIENCE? OKAY.
SO SIR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, TO COME UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU LIVE, SO YOU GOT A LETTER ABOUT MS. HOUSE, YOU RECEIVED A LETTER.
SO IF YOU'D GIVE US YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU LIVE, AND I LIVE AT SEVEN 17 EASTERN STREET, WHICH IS NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPERTY AND EVERYTHING I'VE HEARD TONIGHT INDICATES THAT THE EXISTING REMAINING PART OF THE STRUCTURE CAN'T REALLY BE REBUILT BECAUSE OF ALL THESE CRACKS AND DETERIORATION OF EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN EXPOSED FOR TWO OR THREE YEARS TO THE ELEMENTS.
SO BASICALLY YOU WOULD BE TRYING TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING OR THIS BUILDING OR THE REMAINS OF IT EXISTS.
AND SOMEHOW I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW THAT WOULD MEET THE CRITERIA OF BEING A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WHEN THE WHOLE THING WOULD HAVE TO BE REFILLED.
THE OTHER BIG THING THAT CONCERNS ME IS THAT LIVING ON EAST FRONT STREET AND LOOKING AT EVERYTHING THAT'S THERE AND EVERYTHING THAT WILL BE THERE WITH RIVER STATION IS FINISHED.
IT'S QUITE A RESURGENCE TO THAT END OF EACH FRENCH STREET.
UH, WE BUILD OUR NEW HOUSE TWO YEARS AGO.
UH, THE GARDENERS BUILT A NEW HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET, UH, FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO.
THERE WAS AN EMPTY LOT NEXT TO THE GARDENERS THAT PEOPLE ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD A NICE NEW HOME ON THE MASK AND TO SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT MORE.
THERE'S A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT I SEE QUITE A RESURGENCE IN THAT END OF EAST FRONT STREET IN THE LAST NUMBER OF YEARS, AND NOW WITH RIVER STATION BEING BUILT UP, UH, THAT ADDS TO IT EVEN MORE.
THERE'S ONE OTHER VACANT, LOT ACROSS THE STREET NEXT TO THE GARNER HOME.
THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT ON WITH A NICE NEW HOME.
UH, THIS LOT NEEDS TO HAVE A HOME ON IT BECAUSE I THINK THAT REPRESENTS THE PROGRESS OF NEWBURN, THE CITY EAST FRONT STREET, WHICH IS ALREADY A BEAUTIFUL STREET.
UH, I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THIS IS A GOOD IDEA TO REBUILD SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T FIT INTO TODAY'S WORLD.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S RECOGNIZED AS A STORAGE FACILITY, BUT WHAT WAS A HISTORIC FACILITY IS NOW JUST A CEMENT BLOCK SHELL.
SO I ASKED YOU TO CONSIDER ALL THAT AND, UH, I LET MY WORST NIGHTMARE COME TRUE.
[00:35:01]
FOR COMING TO NICER AND SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US.ARE THERE ANY NOTIFY FIVE OPPONENT OF, OKAY, THERE'S A GUY, THERE'S SOMEBODY ELSE, A GUY, ANOTHER PROPONENT.
SO IF YOU GIVE YOUR NAME AND W UH, YOU RECEIVED A LETTER MCKAY AND WHERE YOU LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THIS STRUCTURE.
I OWN THE LOT AT SEVEN 19 EAST FRONT STREET.
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS GENTLEMEN, I LIVE IN SKY SALE.
UM, THIS HOUSE WAS A VICTIM OF FLORENCE.
THE HOUSE DOES NOT REPRESENT MUCH OF ANYTHING IN THE STATE THAT IT'S IN.
UH, IT HAS, IT DOESN'T HAVE A ROOF THAT DOESN'T HAVE WINDOWS.
IT'S NOT MUCH OF A FLOOR PLAN.
IT'S KIND OF A MASSIVE PROBLEM IN THE EYESORE, UM, STATING THAT IT REPRESENTS A PERIOD OF OUR HISTORY TODAY IS NO LONGER TRUE.
AND I AM FOR THE PROPOSED, UM, NEW PLANS FOR THE LOT.
I THANK YOU FOR COMING TONIGHT TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US.
SO IS THERE ANY MORE BROKE BONES? OKAY.
WELL, BUT YOU DIDN'T RECEIVE A LETTER OR ANYTHING.
YOU'RE A PART OF THE APPLICATION.
SO YOU COULD SPEAK LATER WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A REBUTTAL, GOOD GUY.
CAUSE YOU'RE NOT IN THIS GROUP, YOU DIDN'T GET A LETTER AND YOU DON'T LIVE IN A HUNDRED FIFTH YEAR, NOT IN THIS GRIP.
SO NO MORE PRO BONES OUT THERE.
WE DON'T HAVE VERY MANY PEOPLE IS, ARE, ARE THERE ANY NOTIFIED OPPONENTS SAYING, UH, SO THE APPLICANT, UM, CAN MAKE A REBUTTAL.
NOW, IF YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING NOW ABOUT WHAT'S BEEN SAID AT THIS POINT, MADAM CHAIR, JUST AS A POINT OF CLARITY, UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PROJECT THAT THE PROPERTIES UNDER CONTRACT, SO THIS GENTLEMAN IS NOT AN APPLICANT.
HOWEVER, THE CHAIR IN HER DISCRETION CAN ALLOW THIS GENTLEMAN TO SPEAK.
IF YOU THINK THAT INFORMATION WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO YOUR DELIBERATION.
SO IF HE KNOWS HOW TO SPEAK, IF HE DOESN'T SPEAK NOW IS ELLIE, THIS IS THE ONLY TIME THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK.
WELL, THERE ISN'T A SECTION ON OTHERS WITH EVIDENCE AS OPPOSED TO REBUTTAL, SAME THING, BUT WHAT'S THE POINT OF IT.
SO DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WITH EACH SPEAKS NOW AND LATER? I THINK THAT'S NEXT ANYWAY, IT'S NEXT ANYWAYS.
I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS, BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS GENTLEMAN IS NOT THE APPLICANT.
HE'S SOMEONE ELSE WHO'S BEEN SWARMED WHO WOULD LIKE TO OFFER EVIDENCE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
YES, MA'AM, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY TRUE WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING.
SHOULD I SIT DOWN? AND THAT WILL GIVE YOU A FEW MINUTES, A FEW MINUTES RIGHT NOW, BUT WE'VE ALREADY SEEN YOUR LETTER AND YOUR INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE SHARED.
UM, ONE THING THAT I JUST WANT TO TRY TO CLARIFY AND UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE LETTERS FROM SHIP, UH, UM, UH, AND I'LL JUST READ IT.
IT SAYS AS A RESULT OF THE DAMAGE OF HURRICANE DAMAGE, THE REMOVAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS DESCRIBED ABOVE, UH, AND, UH, THE CONTINUED DETERIORATION OF THE BUILDING, UH, THE BUILDING NO LONGER RETAINS, INTEGRITY OF DESIGN MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP, AND FEELING, UH, HE'S TALKING ABOUT, UM, IT NO LONGER RETAINS THE THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE IT SIGNIFICANT STATEWIDE, BUT THEY WOULD ALSO APPLY TO MAKING IT CAUSE SIGNIFICANT LOCALLY.
UH IT'S WHAT WAS THERE, IT'S NOT THERE, UH, ANYMORE.
UH, HE WROTE TWO MORE DETAILED, UH, EMAILS AFTER, AFTER THAT ONE WAS WRITTEN AT NINE IN THE MORNING, IT WAS, IT WAS WRITTEN AT ONE 30 IN THE AFTERNOON.
HE KIND OF TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT, BUT HE, HE, HE SAID THAT THAT HOUSE FALLS WITHIN THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, UH, HAS ALL OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS.
BUT THE IMPORTANT THING IS, IS THAT IF THE PROPERTY, IF THE PROPERTY RETAINS, ITS, UH, UH, INTEGRITY IS, IS IF YOU SAID IT DOESN'T RETAIN ITS INTEGRITY, IT DOESN'T SAY IT, IT HAS TO START SIGNIFICANCE.
THEY SAID, IF IT DOES, THEN ALL THESE THINGS CAN BE CONSIDERED.
SO I KINDA THINK IT, UH, WHAT IS THERE IS A CMU SHELL, UH, NOTHING ELSE.
UH, AND SO, SO IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT AND I CAN'T COME, I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER, I'M NOT A HISTORIAN, BUT THAT WAS JUST ONE POINT THAT I WANTED TO TRY TO CLARIFY OR UNDERSTAND BETTER.
UH, IT SEEMED TO ME THAT HE WAS SAYING THAT THERE'S NO STRUCTURE TO EVALUATE MAN.
IT'S BEEN ALLOWED TO DETERIORATE AND IT NO LONGER
[00:40:01]
HAS INTEGRITY.THE FINAL THING I WANT TO OFFER IS, UM, I'M A, I'M A BUYER OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, I DON'T INTEND TO SELL IT.
I GREW UP HERE, UM, AND TEND TO LIVE THERE.
UH, SO MY BAR FOR, AND I KNOW WE DON'T WANT LIKE TO TALK ABOUT COST AND PRACTICAL THINGS, BUT ANY PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL THAT WOULD BUY THE PROPERTY WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO CONSIDER THE COST OF THE PROPERTY.
AND, UH, IF IT, YOU KNOW, GOT TOO OLD TO LIVE IN IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO SELL IT AND YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THINGS LIKE THAT.
UH, SO MY BAR NOT HAVING TO MAKE A PROFIT, WHEN IS A LOT LOWER THAN ANY OTHER PERSON THAT WOULD BUY THIS HOUSE.
SO WHAT I'M SAYING, IF WE CAN'T DEMOLISH THIS HOUSE, THEN THAT KIND OF PUTS, IN MY OPINION, THE OWNER IN A VERY DIFFICULT POSITION IN THAT YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO MAKE THE HOUSE HABITABLE.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT THAT'S JACKING THE FLOOR UP TO FROM SIX TO 12 FFE.
UH, YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO DO THAT.
YOU, YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO PUT A ROOF ON IT AND HAVE SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN'T LIVE IN.
UH, SO, SO IT'S, IT'S GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD.
SO I SEE IT BEING A HUGE BURDEN TO, UH, TO THE, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
WOULDN'T SAY IT WOULDN'T BOTHER ME.
I DON'T, I CLOSE ON THE PROPERTY, UH, BUT IT WOULD PUT A HUGE BURDEN ON HER.
UM, AND I INTEND TO DO SOMETHING.
UM, THAT'S GONNA BENEFIT NEWBURN BENEFIT.
HE'S FRONT THREE, UH, BE GOOD FOR THE STREETSCAPE.
AND, UH, AND, UH, UH, I THINK IT SHOULD BE APPROVED THAT WE, UH, LET US STARE AT, LET'S SAY A THING NOW.
THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT WITH US.
SO IS THERE ANY, UH, REBUTTAL FROM THE PROPONENTS WE'VE HAD TWO OF Y'ALL, ANYTHING ELSE YOU ALL WANT TO SAY? HEARING NONE.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE WITH RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND HAS STANDING? WE DON'T HAVE A, JUST ONE OR TWO PEOPLE LEFT IN THE AUDITS THAT SPOKE, BUT SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT.
SO, SIR, COULD YOU TELL US THE STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS? DEFINITELY.
SO, UH, THIS IS FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT IS ROSALIE MCDEVITT AND GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN.
UH, AND THE PROJECT ADDRESS IS SEVEN 15 EAST FRONT STREET.
THE HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME IS THE BENGAL HOUSE BUILT CIRCA 1950 AND WAS LISTED AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, UH, IN THE 2003 NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY, UH, WHICH DESCRIBES IT AS A ONE-STORY FOUR BAYS WIDE, TWO BAYS, DEEP TO EIGHT LIGHT CASEMENTS FIRST AND SECOND BAYS FRONT ENTRANCE IN THIRD BAY, LARGE DOUBLE CASEMENT IN A RIGHT BAY AND GABLE AND ROOF ENTER YOUR RIDGE CHIMNEY OFFSET TO RIGHT.
AND THE SANDBAG BOOK HAD NO DESCRIPTION FOR IT.
SO SEVEN 15 EAST FRONT STREET.
THE PROPOSAL IS TO INCLUDE DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
IT'S NOT THE, UH, REDEVELOPMENT AT THIS POINT.
SO THE GUIDELINES WILL BE SUBMITTED, UH, THAT ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION, UH, 6.4 0.2 6.4 POINT WHILE I GUESS I SHOULD READ THESE VISITS THE FIRST TIME GOING THROUGH THESE, IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO DEMOLISH A VIABLE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN ORDER TO CREATE AN INFILL CONSTRUCTION OPPORTUNITY, 6.4 0.3, THE HPC RESERVES THE RIGHT TO POSTPONE DEMOLITION UNTIL DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING PERMITS ARE APPROVED FOR REDEVELOPMENT PLANS, 6.4 0.4, PREPARE DRAWINGS AND PHOTOGRAPHICALLY DOCUMENT.
THE SITE PRIOR TO DEMOLITION INCLUDE PHOTOGRAPHS OF INTERIORS, EXTERIORS, ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, AND CONTEXT WITHIN THE STREETSCAPE AND 6.4 0.5 NOTIFY PRESERVATION ORGANIZATIONS AND ALLOW FOR THE SALVAGE OF DESIGN COMPONENTS, ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND BUILDING MATERIALS FOR REUSE.
IN ADDITION, THE GUIDELINES STIPULATE HPC SHOULD ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING THREE CONSIDERATIONS.
WE WENT THROUGH THESE EARLIER CONSIDERATIONS ONE, TWO, AND THREE.
SO STATEMENTS OR REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION IN STEPS, JUDGMENT ARE ONE.
THE PROJECT IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH A CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE TO THE STRUCTURE IS IN SERIOUS DISREPAIR AS SUBSTANTIAL STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES, AND IS NOT VIABLE DUE TO A COMBINATION OF HURRICANE DAMAGE.
SUBSEQUENT INTERIOR ELEVATION AND REHABILITATION CONSTRUCTION, A PAUSE IN THE CONSTRUCTION AFTER REMOVING THE ROOF AND WINDOWS, THEN NEGLECTING TO PROTECT THE STRUCTURE FROM THE ELEMENTS FOR OVER ONE YEAR
[00:45:02]
THREE REHABILITATION AND REUSE OF THE STRUCTURE AS A DWELLING WOULD REQUIRE ELEVATING THE STRUCTURE, WHICH HAS TWICE PROVEN TO BE UNBUYABLE FOUR.THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW HOUSE AND GARAGE FOR THE PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, THE DESIGN OF WHICH WILL STILL NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THE HPC FIVE REUSE OF THE STRUCTURE AS THE GARAGE FOR THE NEW HOUSE.
IT'S NOT POSSIBLE WITHOUT DESTROYING THE HISTORIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STRUCTURE.
SIX, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY AND SEVEN.
THE PROJECT IS NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
HOWEVER, WITH THE CONDITION THAT DEMOLITION MAY NOT PROCEED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS ARE MET, ONE THROUGH FOUR, ONE, A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS ISSUED FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL.
TWO BUILDING PERMITS ARE APPROVED FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL.
THREE DRAWINGS OF THE STRUCTURE ARE SUBMITTED TO THE HPA FOR DOCUMENTATION IS SUBMITTED TO THE HPA REGARDING THE APPLICANT'S NOTIFICATION TO PRESERVATION ORGANIZATIONS AND ALLOWING FOR THE SALVAGE OF DESIGN COMPONENTS, ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND BUILDING MATERIALS FOR REUSE.
I'D LIKE TO ALSO ADD, UM, THAT A DEMOLITION PERMIT ALSO BE REQUIRED BEFORE.
SO DO WE HAVE ANYBODY HERE FOR EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY FROM THE STAKE CITY OR ANY GOVERNMENTAL BODY SEEING THAT MAP? WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE ANY FINAL COMMENTS? NO, SHE WOULD NOT LIKE TO.
SO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE? WHAT DISCUSSIONS WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL FOR DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.
WE DON'T HAVE THE OWNER HERE, I GUESS, AS THE OWNER SIGNED ON THE OWNER IS ROSALIE MCDERMOTT, MCDEVITT.
AND, UH, I MEAN, I'VE BROUGHT THIS PROJECT BEFORE YOU ALL PREVIOUSLY SHE'S AWARE OF, YOU KNOW, SHE SIGNED THE OWNER OF ROTATION.
SHE WANTS THIS TO GO FORWARD AND, YOU KNOW, HONESTLY SHE MOVED OUT OF STATE.
HER HUSBAND HAS ALL SIMERS, YOU KNOW, AND SHE HAS THIS PROPERTY LEFT IN NEWBURN.
AND SO SHE'S NOT HERE AS A PRESENT OWNER.
AND IS THAT SUFFICIENT FOR US TO AGREE, TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING? SO LEGALLY, DID SHE NOT SIGN THE DOCUMENT? I REPRESENT HER, SHE SIGNED THE DOCTOR OWNER OCCUPATION, WHICH SEEN THAT DOCTOR, THIS APPLICATION EXCEPT IN THE NEXT RUN OF IT.
WE'VE SEEN THAT DOCUMENT, RIGHT? YES.
MA'AM ATTORNEY AGREES WITH US.
MA'AM, THERE'S A DULY AUTHORIZED OWNERS AUTHORIZATION, WHICH ALLOWS HIMSELF ABOUT TO REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE OWNER.
SHE CAN GO AND SHE IS NOT HERE NOW AND YEAH.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS AS WE VOTE TO THE DEMOTION DEMOLITION OF THIS? WELL, I THINK IT'S WORTHY OF NOTION.
WE HAD, UH, MENTIONED THAT WE HAD A PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION DURING DESIGN REVIEW AND HAD COVERED A LOT OF THESE ISSUES.
UM, AS I LOOK AT THE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE BULLETS UNDERNEATH EACH ONE, UM, AT THE TIME OF DESIGN REVIEW, ONLY ONE OF 3, 6, 7, 8, ONLY ONE OF EIGHT OF THOSE ITEMS WAS IN QUESTION AT THAT POINT.
AND IT WAS, UH, THIS IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, AT LEAST IN TERMS OF OUR NOMINATION LETTER.
UM, WE'VE RECEIVED, UH, AN EVALUATION FROM THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE THAT STATES THAT, UH, THE LOSS OF HISTORIC FABRIC AND INTEGRITY ESSENTIALLY, UH, ELIMINATES THE CRITERIA THAT ALLOWED IT TO BE A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
SO AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, I THINK WE'VE, UM, NOT COVERED ALL THE GROUND AND DONE ALL THE DUE DILIGENCE, BUT RELATIVE TO SIMILAR TYPES OF APPLICATIONS.
THIS ONE IS CLEARLY, UH, IN A CERTAIN COLUMN, IN MY OPINION.
THANK YOU SIR, FOR COVERING THAT.
CAUSE WE DID SPEND A LOT OF TIME IN DESIGN REVIEW DISCUSSING ALL OF THESE THINGS AND, UH, WE'RE THANKFUL THAT, UH, JOHN WOODS WAS VERY QUICK AND WE THANK STAFF FOR GETTING TO HIM AND GETTING TO VERY SPECIFIC, DEEP INFORMATION AND DETAILS THAT WE AS A COMMISSION NEEDED
[00:50:01]
TO HAVE BEFORE WE COULD MAKE A DETERMINATION.NOW, JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THAT POINT, DOES ANYBODY ON THE COMMISSION HAD ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE, UH, FROM ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT JOHN WOODS SHARED WITH US AND ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING WHAT NEEDS TO, WHAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND AND HAVE TO DEMOLISH THIS BUILDING? DOES ANYBODY HAVE A QUESTION? I THINK IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, SAY IT, ASK IT NOW BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING READY TO GO PAST THE POINT OF NO RETURN QUESTION.
IT'S CALLED A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT DOES IT CONTRIBUTE? I MEAN, YOU CAN'T BUILD ON THE PROPERTY UNLESS YOU LET IT GO.
IT'S AN OSS OR TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE NO ONE ELSE CAN PURCHASE IT TO PUT ANYTHING ON IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO PUT THAT MUCH MONEY INTO IT TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING.
SO STRUCTURE, WHEN IT WAS BUILT, WHEN IT WAS A HOLE, I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS BUILDING FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME, A YEAR OR MORE.
AND IT HAD A ROOF WHEN IT HAD A CHIMNEY, WHEN YOU COULD GO IN IT AND BEFORE THE HURRICANE CAME AND DID TERRIBLE THINGS TO IT.
AND THEN IT HAD SAT FOR TWO OR THREE YEARS AND IT NOW DOES NOT.
AND THIS IS THE POINT THAT I THINK EVERYBODY IS MAKING.
IS THAT IT NO LONGER LOOKS LIKE A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING THERE, BUT WALLS EVEN, I DON'T KNOW IF ALL OF YOU ALL, I'M ASSUMING ALL OF YOU ALL HAVE, AND I KNOW I'VE CERTAINLY BEEN OUT THERE YESTERDAY.
THERE'S NOTHING LEFT, BUT WALLS AND SORRY, YOU PROVIDED, I THINK YOU PROVIDED THOSE PICTURES.
DID YOU NOT? UM, AND THERE'S CRACKS AND MANY OF THOSE WALLS, UM, AND AS HAS BEEN STATED, THE BUILDING CAN'T BE LIFTED UP.
UM, IT IS JUST WALLS SITTING OUT THERE AT THIS POINT.
SO IT'S A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WAY BACK, YOU KNOW, YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS A BUILDING THAT WAS INHABITABLE, BUT IT IS NO LONGER HAS THAT CHARACTER OF BEING A CONTRIBUTOR INSTRUCTOR.
DOES THAT HELP YOU? YEAH, I COULD NOT AGREE MORE.
IT IS AT THIS POINT, I THINK WE HAD TO JUST FACE THE FACT THAT TIME DOES MOVE ON.
SO, SO NOBODY ELSE HAS A QUESTION AT THIS POINT.
SO W WE, UH, THE STAFF, UH, HAS EMOTION HERE ABOUT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN.
UM, SO LET ME READ THIS AGAIN, RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION, APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
HOWEVER, WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE DEMOLITION MAY NOT PROCEED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS ARE MET, THERE'S FOUR LISTS IN HERE AND FIVE NEEDS TO BE THAT YOU GET A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
SO THESE THINGS, YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT THESE THINGS WOULD HAVE TO BE MET BEFORE THE BUILDING COULD BE DEMOLISHED.
SO I SEE THESE TWO PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH THIS BUILDING, SHAKING THEIR HEAD.
JUST SO WE'RE ALL CLEAR, MADAM, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO MAKE CLEAR BEFORE WE DO THIS? NOT THAT IT HASN'T BEEN ADDRESSED.
SO, UH, CAN'T WE HAVE A MOTION, UM, FOR THIS APPLICATION OF DEMOLISHING THIS CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, UH, WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THESE FOUR CONDITIONS THAT ARE ARE HERE AND THE FIFTH CONDITION BEING THAT A DEMOLITION PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED.
AND THAT, UH, THE, THE, THE, UH, BUILDING CANNOT BE DEMOLISHED UNTIL THESE FIVE THINGS ARE TAKEN CARE OF KID.
CAN I, CAN I HAVE A MOTION? YES.
WE APPROVED THE DEMOLITION OF THE PROPERTY AT, UH, SEVEN 15 EAST FRONT STREET, BASED ON THE STANDARDS FOR DEMOLITION 6.4 0.2 THROUGH FIVE.
AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS STATED IN MATS, UM, RECOMMENDATION PLUS THE CONDITION OF A DEMOLITION PERMIT IS THAT SUFFICIENT.
I WOULD STATE THE CONDITIONS SPECIFICALLY.
SO GO THROUGH THESE FOUR CONDITIONS, RIGHT IN HERE, CERTIFICATE BASED ON THE CONDITION OF THE CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATELY BE ISSUED FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL.
THE BUILDING PERMITS ARE APPROVED FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARTIAL DRAWINGS OF THE STRUCTURE OF SUBMITTED TO HPC.
[00:55:03]
BE ME HPA HPA DOCUMENTATION IS SUBMITTED TO THE HBA REGARDING THE APPLICANT'S NOTIFICATION TO PRESERVATION ORGANIZATIONS ALIGNED FOR THE SALVAGE DESIGN COMPONENTS, ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND BUILDING MATERIALS FOR REUSE.AND THE APPLICANT GETS A, UH, A PERMIT FOR DEMOLITION.
SO I JUST WANT TO ASK ME ONE MORE TIME.
JUST, I KNOW I MAY BE DELIVERING ANSWER, BUT WE ARE SAYING THAT WE'RE GOING TO DEMOLISH ONE OF OUR BUILDINGS HERE IN THE CITY.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT NO OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE VOTE, OR ANY COMMENTS WE NEED A SECOND.
I ASKED THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER, BISBY AUGMENT YOUR MOTION TO INCLUDE FINDINGS OF FACT, I WOULD DO THAT.
WHAT DID YOU CONSTRUE AS A FINDINGS OF FACT, THE SEVEN ITEMS YOU HAD, IF YOU WANT, I'D BE GLAD TO INCLUDE THOSE AS FINDINGS OF THAT.
YOU WANT ME TO STATE THAT? YEAH.
BECAUSE YOU NEED TO STATE THEM ALL.
SO IT'S ALL THE RECORDS, SO THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR THAT WE'RE GOING SINCE WE'RE LOOKING AT DEMOLISHING A BUILDING HERE IN TOWN, FINDINGS OF FACT, TO BE ON THE PROJECT IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH THE CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE STRUCTURES IN SERIOUS DISREPAIR HAS SUBSTANTIAL STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES AND IS NOT VIABLE DUE TO A COMBINATION OF HURRICANE DAMAGE, SUBSEQUENT INTERIOR ELEVATION AND REHABILITATION CONSTRUCTION, A PAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION AFTER REMOVING THE ROOF AND WINDOWS THEN NEGLECTING TO PROTECT THE STRUCTURE FROM THE ELEMENTS FOR OVER ONE YEAR REHABILITATION AND REUSE OF THE STRUCTURE AS A DWELLING WOULD REQUIRE ELEVATING THE STRUCTURE, WHICH HAS TWICE PROVEN TO BE UNVIABLE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW HOUSE AND GARAGE FOR THE PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, THE DESIGN OF WHICH WILL STILL NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THE HPC REUSE OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE GARAGE FOR THE NEW HOUSE IS NOT POSSIBLE WITHOUT DESTROYING THE HISTORIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STRUCTURE.
ARE THERE SOME MORE THERE? THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRESS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
ALL IN FAVOR THE SECOND, SECOND, SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY, AYE.
SO AT THIS POINT, THEN WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS FOR THE, UM, CONDITIONS TO BE MET BY THEM, REPORTING BACK TO YOU, IS THAT THE POINT THAT, SO THEIR NEXT STEP IS TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL, UH, WITH, OR WITHOUT THE, UM, EXISTING BUILDING.
UM, BUT, UH, UH, AND THEN PROCEED FROM THERE AT SOME POINT, UH, WHEN THAT, IF, AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THAT THEY RECEIVE APPROVAL.
UH, AND THEN THEY HAVE THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE JUST LISTED AS CONDITIONS ALSO, UM, TAKEN CARE OF EVENTUALLY, UH, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE.
SO THEN YOU ALL NEED TO BE IN COMMUNICATION, UM, WITH, UH, THIS GENTLEMAN HERE FOR, FOR YOU ALL TO MOVE FORWARD.
AND I WOULD SUBMIT THAT, UM, UH, THE DRAWINGS MAY BE THE DRAWINGS, UH, BECAUSE THE DRAWINGS AT THE MOMENT WOULD BE OF A SEMI DEMOLISHED STRUCTURE.
I WOULD SUBMIT THAT THE DRAWINGS SHOULD ACTUALLY END UP BEING THE DRAWINGS MAYBE THAT, UM, CHARLES FRANCIS HAD DONE EARLIER WHEN IT WAS STILL A SINGLE, UH, STRUCTURE.
I MEAN, IT WAS, UH, UH, AND IT'S, UH, ORIGINAL CONDITION.
SO THEY'LL COMMUNICATE WITH YOU UNTIL THEY NEED TO COME BACK TO US ONCE THEY HAVE PLANNED FOR THE NEW HOUSE.
INSTEAD, IT BECOMES A RECORD OF A PREVIOUSLY HISTORIC STRUCTURE, UM, AND FOR POSTERITY AND FUTURE RESEARCH OR OTHERWISE.
UM, SO NOBODY WANTS TO END UP SEEING A PICK, YOU KNOW, A DRAWING OF A HOUSE WITH NO ROOF AND NO CHIMNEY AND YOU KNOW, ALL THAT STUFF MISSING.
AND THEN THERE, I GUESS THERE'LL BE
[01:00:01]
SOME PICTURE TWO OF THEM.WE HAVE 30 PICTURES OF IT NOW.
SO I THINK THE PICTURES ARE GOOD.
MA'AM IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE SHOULD DO? YES.
MADAM CHAIR, IF THE COA IS NOT GOING TO BE ISSUED TONIGHT, UM, WE NEED A MOTION TO DELAY THE ISSUANCE OF THE COA.
AND THAT MOTION SHOULD, UM, INCLUDE FINDINGS TO SUPPORT THE DELAY.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, BY WAY OF EXAMPLE, I MOVED TO CONTINUE OR DELAY THE ISSUANCE OF THE COA, UM, TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE 1, 2, 3, 4 TO THE HPC, UM, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS.
AND THAT, AND THAT COULD BE PURSUANT TO GUIDELINE 6.4 0.3.
I HAD NOTED THAT EARLIER THAT WE NEED TO DO THAT CUT.
SO, UH, LET US HAVE EMOTION RELATED TO THAT.
I MOVED THAT WE CONTINUE, UH, APPROVAL OF THE, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS PENDING THE COMPLETION OF ITEM 6.4 0.3 IN OUR EDIT DEMOLITION STANDARDS.
AND DO WE NEED TO SPECIFY SPECIFICALLY WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE? THE FIVE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE IN THIS? SO IF YOU COULD GO ON DOWN HERE, YOU COULD SCROLL DOWN SO THAT HE CAN SAY THAT I CAN ASSIST MR. BISBEE.
I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS YOU MOVE TO CONTINUE.
THE ISSUANCE OF THE COA FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS SEVEN 15 EAST FRONT STREET, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING, FINDING OF FACT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS NOT YET SUBMITTED NOR NORMAN APPROVAL, OR GOTTEN AN APPROVAL FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, DEMOLITION PERMIT, OR PROVIDED DRAWINGS OF THE STRUCTURE OF, AND THE COA FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF A PERSON OR A COA FOR THE DEVELOPMENT REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL AND NEEDS TIME TO DO SO.
AND THAT DELAYING THE ISSUANCE OF A COA FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE JUSTIFIED FAIR AND REASONABLE.
DO YOU WANT ME TO REMIND YOU ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS SECOND MOTION, SAY, AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED TO THE MOTION PASSED.
IS THERE ANYTHING MA'AM WHAT ELSE WE NEED TO DO? NOT AS IT RELATES TO THIS APPLICATION.
WE, WE DON'T DO THIS VERY OFTEN, SO WE NEED TO CHECK OFF ALL OUR BOXES.
SO I BELIEVE WE ARE DONE WITH, UH, ITEMS SEVEN 15 EAST ROCK STREET, AND IT'D BE UP TO YOU ALL SARAH, TO GET IN CONTACT SHIT.
Y'ALL SARAH TO GET IN CONTACT WITH MATT TO MOVE FORWARD, AND THEN WE'LL BE SEEING YOU AT SOME POINT.
TOM TELLS YOU TO, IF I SAID, UM, UH, MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THAT.
WE BRING THE SULLIVAN BACK TO THE, OKAY.
SAY I NEED A SECOND NEEDED SECOND FOR THE MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ABOUT A SECOND OVER HERE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO SEE YOU AGAIN.
[3.C. 302 Broad St. – to include application of a masonry water repellant in all AVCs.]
BOTTOM IS 3 0 2 BROAD STREET.WHICH HAS GOTTA BE DELAYED UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.
WE WOULD LIKE, UH, THEY HAVE REQUESTED ESSENTIALLY A CONTINUOUS TO THE NEXT MEETING.
IF YOU WOULD HAVE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE APPLICANT, ARE THEY GOING TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT MEETING NEXT MONTH? NOVEMBER 17, TILL NOVEMBER THE 17TH.
SO WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO NOVEMBER THE 17TH AT 5:30 PM IN THE COURTROOM, SECOND FLOOR, CITY HALL OF NEWBURGH.
WE NEED ALL THOSE DETAILS IN THAT MADAM CHAIR.
[01:05:01]
THE APPLICATION FOR THREE, A TWO BROAD STREET TO NOVEMBER 17TH, 2021, UH, 5:30 PM HERE AT CITY HALL AND THE COURTROOM, UH, AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
SO WE'LL SEE THAT ON NOVEMBER THE 17TH.
[3.D. 407 Avenue D – to include a new shed in the Tertiary AVC.]
AVENUE.D CAN WE HEAR SOME INFORMATION ABOUT A NEW SHARED IN THE TERTIARY? OKAY.
UM, FOUR, SEVEN AVENUE D UH, THE APPLICANT HAS ARRIVED AFTER THE SWEARING IN, SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND SWEAR THAT IT'S GOING TO SAY HE WAS NOT HERE.
I WAS GOING TO WAIT EITHER BEFORE OR AFTER YOU DID YOUR THING.
SO UNDER SCREENS, YOU'LL SEE THAT US AS THE APPLICATION FOR 4 0 7 AVENUE D THE OWNERS ARE JOHN ROLAND DOW AND ALICE AND YALE, AND THE APPLICANT IS JOHN GLEESON.
UM, AND WE'LL SEE THAT THE APPLICATION IS TO INSTALL A FREE FABRICATED 12 BY 32 GAMBREL ROOF SHED IN THE BACKYARD.
AND WE PROVIDED A WHOLE SERIES OF GUIDELINES AND A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WE'LL SEE IN A MINUTE.
AND THERE IT IS SIGNED BY MR.
SO FIRST WE'LL START OFF WITH, UH, JUST AN OVERVIEW OF THE, AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SITE.
SO, UM, IN YELLOW, HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW, UH, AND W AMONG OTHER THINGS, WELL, SO THE, UM, THE SHED IS TO BE LOCATED BACK HERE IN THE SHADE OF THESE TREES BACK HERE.
UM, BUT TO NOTE HERE ARE, IS THAT THERE ARE FOUR NEIGHBORS SO THAT WE DON'T GET CONFUSED.
UM, THERE'S A NEIGHBOR TO, UH, THE NORTHEAST HERE, UH, THERE, WHICH THEIR PROPERTY ENDS ACTUALLY BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS, UH, BACK HERE, AND THEN A NEIGHBOR WHO ACTUALLY FRONTS ON PASTORA STREET.
UH, AND THEY HAVE THIS BUILDING HERE.
THEN THERE ISN'T, THERE ARE TWO NEIGHBORS OFF OF NATIONAL AVENUE.
UH, THIS FIRST ONE HERE HAS A, UM, OUTBUILDING BACK HERE IN THIS CORNER OF THEIR PROPERTY.
AND THEN FINALLY, MR. FRIESEN ACTUALLY LIVES IN THIS CORNER LOT, UH, AND HE HAS A LARGE GARAGE THAT'S ACTUALLY LOCATED IN THIS CORNER OF THAT LOT ALSO TO NOTE, UH, AND IT WILL SHOW, IT WILL SHOW UP CONFUSING IN A MINUTE, BUT, UH, THERE IS A FENCE ON MR.
THE PROPERTY LINE ACTUALLY IS KIND OF ALONG THE SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY.
AGAIN, THE YELLOW BOX IS NOT ENTIRELY ACCURATE.
SO THEREBY WE'RE THERE FOR, WE HAVE A SITE PLAN AND THE SITE PLAN, UM, SHOWS A LITTLE BIT BETTER, UM, THAT THE PROPERTIES, PROPERTY LINES FOR THE PROPERTY ARE NINE FEET FROM THE HOUSE ON THIS, UH, LEFT SIDE.
AND, UH, MR.
WE HAVE NUMBERS FOR THESE, SO WE CAN REFERENCE THEM IF WE WANT 14, 16 IS HIS, THE NEXT ONE DOWN IS 14, 10.
UH, THE NEIGHBOR ON AVENUE D IS 4 0 5 AND HAS THEIR SHED HERE.
AND THE PROPOSAL IS TO PUT THE SHED BACK THERE WITH THE REST OF THE SHEDS.
SO TO SAY, UH, EQUALLY SPACE TO THE SIDE YARDS AT NINE FEET, WHICH IS WAY BEYOND THE MINIMUM.
UM, WE DO HAVE EVER NEEDED DIMENSION TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, 12 FEET TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
AND THEN IS MORE THAN EIGHT FEET TO THE MAIN HOUSE, UH, AND OTHERWISE,
[01:10:01]
UH, WE'LL MOVE ON.SO FIRST WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, UH, AND THIS IS WHY I WAS SAYING IT WOULD BE CONFUSING.
THIS FRAT WAY IS NOT THE SUBJECT DRIVEWAY TO THE SUBJECT HOUSE.
THIS IS MR. IN THIS DRIVEWAY AND HIS GARAGE BACK HERE.
UH, THE PROPERTY LINE MUST BE SOMEWHERE ALONG IN BETWEEN HERE ABOUT NINE FEET FROM THE EXISTING HOUSE, FROM THE SUBJECT HOUSE.
ALRIGHT, THEN THIS IS THE BACKYARD OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND YOU CAN BEGIN TO SEE SOME OF THE OTHER, UM, SHEDS.
THIS ONE IS THE ONE ON NATIONAL AVENUE, UH, THAT IS NOT MR. FRIESENS.
AND THEN ON THE LEFT, WE'LL SEE SOME OTHER PICTURES, BUT THE SHED IS GOING HERE ESSENTIALLY IN FRONT OF WHERE THIS TRAILER IS ON THIS GRASSY AREA.
AND SO NOW THESE ARE THE OTHER TWO SHEDS TO THE LEFT SIDE OR THE EAST EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, WITH THIS, UH, BEING THE ONE FOR AVENUE D AND THIS ONE FOR PASTORA STREET, UH, THEY ARE APPARENTLY RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE OR CLOSE TO AT LEAST THE FENCES.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER ONE ON NATIONAL AVENUE THAT I JUST POINTED OUT A FEW MINUTES AGO IS HERE THE OUTBUILDING.
SO TO SAY, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S THAT, UM, TRAILER, AND YOU CAN SEE THE CORNER OF, UM, MR. PRISON'S GARAGE HERE.
THAT'S A BLACK AND WHITE SHOT, AND NOW A BLACK AND WHITE OF MR. FRIESENS GARAGE THAT WE SAW FROM THE STREET.
UM, THEY PROVIDED, UM, CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE.
THE MAIN ONES WILL BE A FLOOR PLAN, DOES SHOW THAT, UM, IT CAN BE EIGHT TO 13 FEET WIDE AND 12 TO 40 FEET LONG FOR THIS SET OF DRAWINGS REFRAMING THE SECTION, BUT MAINLY THE SIDE ELEVATIONS.
SO THIS WOULD BE THE, ESSENTIALLY THE FRONT FACING THE HOUSE.
AND WE'LL SEE AN ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE, OF THE SAMPLE BUILDING, BUT THAT THIS ONE DOES SHOW THAT THE MATERIALS ARE, UM, EITHER METAL OR FIBERGLASS ROOFING.
AND THEN THE, UM, UH, TRIM IS ONE BY FOUR DIRT TRIM OR DURA, TRIM, AND SIDING IS T1 11 OR DOOR TRIM, TRIM, SIDING.
UM, UH, THEY WILL BE HAVING A DOUBLE DOOR.
UH, IT SHOWS UP AS A COUPLE INCHES OVER THE GROUND ON SKIDS OF SOME SORT, UH, AND ALL OF THOSE ARE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS.
SO THIS WAS THERE, THE ELEVATION WE HAD SEEN LAST WEEK OR TWO WEEKS AGO, BUT, UH, HE'S PROVIDED SOME NEW ONES.
THIS IS NOW A SAMPLE OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE, UH, IN ITS FULL SIZE, UH, AND SHAPE, UM, AND MATERIALS.
UM, JUST THAT THESE MATERIALS, THE WOOD WOULD BE PAINTED.
HE SAID, HAS SAID IN, UH, AN EMAIL IN DOCUMENTATION.
SO, AND THE DOOR YOU CAN SEE AS WELL, THE WINDOWS, UM, IS DOCUMENTED WILL BE METAL WINDOWS.
SO HERE'S THAT DOCUMENTATION ACTUALLY DOWN HERE.
UM, HERE HE'S HAS IN RED, UH, THE WINDOWS WILL BE METAL WOOD.
THE WINDOW PANE DIVIDERS WILL BE METAL.
AND THERE'LL BE NO, UH, PLANS TO COVER THE OPENING, THE LITTLE SLOT UNDERNEATH THE SHED.
AND THEN, UH, FOR ZONING AND INSPECTIONS, UH, THE ZONING OFFICIAL SAID THAT IT MUST MEET SETBACKS AND SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS, WHICH SHE'S DEMONSTRATED IN THE SITE PLAN.
AND THE CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR, UH, SAYS THAT A BUILDING PERMIT IS REQUIRED.
IF ANY DIMENSION IS GREATER THAN 12 FEET BY FAR.
SO THEN WE'RE READY WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON THIS PROJECT HEARING? NONE.
SEE, SIR, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY ABOUT YOUR PROJECT? NOT REALLY, TOO MUCH TO ADD.
THEY, UH, THEY ROMAN ALISHA OR MY PARENTS ARE LAW AND THAT SHIT WILL BE BOTH JOINTLY USED BY ME AS A WORKSHOP INTO MY, BY MY FATHER-IN-LAW, BUT THAT'S WHY WE WENT TO SHED THERE JUST TO STORE THINGS AND TOOLS AND WORK IT IN.
[01:15:01]
RIGHT.OKIE OKEY-DOKEY I'M GOING TO ASK ABOUT NOTIFIED PROPONENTS AND NOTIFIED OPPONENTS, BUT THERE'S NOBODY LEFT OUT THERE UNLESS YOU'RE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE, BUT I DON'T THINK SO.
UH, SO WE DON'T NEED TO GO THROUGH REBUTTAL.
UM, WE DON'T NEED TO GO THROUGH RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND STANDING CAUSE THERE'S NOBODY OUT THERE WITH THAT.
SO I THINK THAT WE WOULD GO TO, AND THERE'S NOBODY FOR THE CITY STATE OR GOVERNMENT OUT THERE.
SO I THINK WE ARE AT STAFF FINDINGS.
SO HERE WE HAVE FOR THE APPLICANTS ARE JOHN AND ALICE YOW AND JOHN FREESON, UH, 4 0 7 AVENUE D IN THIS PROJECT IS TO INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW SHED IN THE TERTIARY, ABC, UH, AND THE 1988 INVENTORY.
THE HOUSE, UH, HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME IS HOUSE, UH, BUILT CIRCA 1926.
IT IS LISTED AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AND THE DESCRIPTION FOR THE HOUSE IS SIMILAR IN FORM TO THE HOUSE AT THE CORNER OF THIS BLOCK, WHICH IS 404 AVENUE C.
THIS L-SHAPED FRAME HOUSE, APPARENTLY DATES FROM THE LATE 1940S.
IT IS TAUGHT BY SINGLE SIDE GABLE ROOF AND HAS A PROJECTED FRONT BAY, LARGE REAR WING, AND AN EXTERIOR IN CHIMNEY.
THERE IS A PICTURE WINDOW TO THE RIGHT OF THE ENTRANCE AND THE GREENHOUSE PORCH ON THE SOUTHWEST ELEVATION.
OTHER WINDOWS ARE SIX OVER SIX SASH.
UH, SAN BECK HAD NO DESCRIPTION OF THAT.
AND SO STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, 2.6 0.1 AND 2.6 0.3 FOR A DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 3.1 0.2 FOR FOUNDATIONS, 4.1 0.2 4.1 0.3 FOR WALLS, TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.4 4.2 0.5 FOR WINDOWS DOORS AND OPENINGS.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY, UH, SINCE THEY'RE NOT DOING A SKIRT AT THE BOTTOM, UH, PAINT 5.42 5.4 0.3, CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5.5 0.1 5.5 0.2 AND 5.5 0.3 STATEMENTS AND REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE THE STRUCTURE AS A CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE IN THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE TERTIARY, ABC, ALL COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY AND FIVE.
THE PROJECT IS NOT INCOME GROSS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW SHED TERTIARY ABC WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION, UH, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF THE SHED IT'S SITE PLAN.
OH, SO I GUESS WE DON'T NEED THAT.
SO FORGET THAT CONDITION DONE.
ANY FINAL COMMENTS YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO MAKE? OKAY.
HEARING THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, WHAT QUESTIONS DO YOU HAVE? WHAT COMMENTS DO YOU WANT TO MAKE AT THIS POINT HEARING NONE.
COULD I HAVE A MOTION RELATED TO THIS PROJECT? UM, I'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE.
THE APPLICATION INCLUDE INSTALLATION OF A NEW SHED, MATURE TERTIARY, ABC.
WE FOLLOWED CONDITION FOR OUR INSTALLATION ON THE SHED, A SITE PLAN SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE SHED WHERE ALL THE PROPERTY LINES AND THE HOUSE BEING SUBMITTED TO THE HPA AND REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY HPC AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND MADAM CHAIR? I THINK THAT, I THINK WHAT MR. BLACK WELDERS MOTION IS, IS IT INSUFFICIENT, INSUFFICIENT? WELL, I THINK WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO SAY WAS THAT HE MOVES TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE SHED AND THE THIRD PERIOD ABC.
AND HE ALSO WANTS TO INCLUDE THE FINDINGS OF FAT THAT ARE ON THE SCREEN LISTED AS STATEMENTS OF REASONING LISTED AS STATEMENTS OF REASONS.
UM, ALSO REQUIRED THAT WE HAVE TO LIST, UH, UH, GUIDE APPROPRIATE GUIDELINES IN THE MOTION.
SO I THINK HIS REVISED MOTION, CAN YOU SCROLL UP? YEP.
WE'LL INCLUDE, UM, THE INFORMATION ABOUT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, DESIGN PRINCIPLES, FOUNDATIONS, ET CETERA.
DO YOU MEAN YOU NEED TO NAME ALL OF THOSE, CORRECT? YES.
[01:20:01]
YOU ALSO MOVE YOUR MICROPHONE A LITTLE CLOSER, PLEASE? I'M SCARED.SO IF YOU, IF YOU WILL GO THROUGH THE ASSESSORY STRUCTURE DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND GIVE THE NUMBERS OVER THERE UNDER EACH OF THOSE ITEMS, AND IF YOU WILL FOLLOW HIM AND SCROLL THEM THROUGH THAT.
SO IN ADDITION, I ALSO, UH, UH, REQUEST THAT THE, UH, FOLLOWING HER IN THE APPLICATION AS WELL.
THE FOLLOWING BASED ON THE FINDING, FOLLOWING THAT FOLLOWING FUNDING, IN FACT, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, 2.6 0.1, 2.6 0.3, DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 3.1 0.2 FOUNDATIONS, 4.1 0.2, 4.1 0.3, WALLS, TRIM ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.4, 4.2 0.5 WINDOWS, DOORS AND OPENINGS TO 4.3 0.2 4.3 0.3, MASONRY 5.1 0.2.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY MAJOR.
ANY I DON'T THERE'S NO RIGHT, BUT GO ON WITH PAINT AND CONTEMPORARY.
I'LL SKIP THE REST OF MASONRY.
YOU GOT TO PAINT 5.4 0.2 5.4 0.3, CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5.5 0.1 5.5 0.2 5.5 0.3.
AND THE NEXT QUESTION, PLEASE.
FINDINGS OF FACT, AND THE FINDINGS.
IN FACT, NUMBER ONE STRUCTURE IS CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE IN A TIGHT WEEK DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE TERROR, TERTIARY, ABC, ALL COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE RECEIVED, REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND RECOMMENDED ACCORDINGLY AND FIVE AND FIND THE PROJECT IS NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND, SECOND.
ALL OF THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO ISSUE A COA? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
YOU UP, YOU GET WITH MATT THEN HE'LL CARRY ON.
[3.E. 810 E. Front St. – to include a new infill house on a vacant parcel.]
18 EAST FRONT STREET WHEN YOU'RE READY, MATT.SO, UH, THIS IS THE APPLICATION FOR EIGHT 10, THESE FRONT STREET.
UH, THE OWNERS ARE KENT AND SHERRY LUCAS AND THE APPLICANT IS GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PLLC, SARAH LUBBOCK AIA.
SO THE APPLICATION IS TO CONSTRUCT A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON AN EMPTY LOT, SEE PLANS AND ELEVATIONS FOR DETAILS AND MATERIAL CHOICES.
UH, WE HAVE A LIST OF GUIDELINES.
UH, THEY FIND APPROPRIATE AND THE D THE MATERIALS ARE ALSO LISTED HERE AS WELL.
AND THE APPLICATION IS SIGNED AND DATED BY THE DULY APPOINTED OWNER'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, WHICH I'LL SHOW IN A YEAR GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BY KEN LUCAS AND NOTARIZED.
SO, UM, THIS IS THE FRONT PAGE, GIVING YOU A, NOT A SNAP, A QUICK PEEK AT THE ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION.
AND THEN ALSO WE HAVE ON THE NEXT SHEET, UH, THE, OH, WAIT, I'M SORRY.
I NEED TO SHOW YOU WHICH LOT IT IS.
UM, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS MIDDLE ONE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IN THIS, UM, SITE PLAN.
SO IT IS, UH, FACING WEST TO THE STREET AND EAST TO THE RIVER.
AND SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE SHOTS OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A VACANT LOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS BLOCK OVER HERE.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO STRUCTURES BUILT THERE, AND THOSE ARE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE OTHER SURROUNDING BUILDINGS NEARBY.
[01:25:01]
THEM, HERE IS A CLOSER UP SITE PLAN, UH, SHOWING YOU AMONG OTHER THINGS THAT FOR THE SITE PLAN BENEFIT IS WE HAVE A FRONT STAIRWAY UP TO THE SIDEWALK.UM, AND OTHERWISE THE BUILDING FITS INSIDE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE.
UM, WE HAVE SOME OTHER AIRPLANES TO LOOK AT IN A MINUTE.
SO SPECIFICALLY THE VERY FIRST BOTTOM LEVEL, UH, WE HAVE, WE SH THE PROPERTY LINE, IT'S ACTUALLY THIS, UH, DASH LINE ON THE TOP AND THE DASH LINE AT THE BOTTOM.
AND THEN THE SOLID LINE HERE IS THE BUILDING ENVELOPE.
UH, AND SO AGAIN, THE STEPS UP TO THE SIDEWALK UP TO, UM, ABOVE THIS LEVEL IS THE ENTRY WAY.
SO THIS LEVEL IS THIS, UH, EAST OR WESTERN HALF IS A GARAGE WITH A STAIRWAY AND AN ELEVATOR.
AND THEN I'M AN EASTERN HALF OF THIS IS ESSENTIALLY OPEN TO THE ELEMENTS IN ESSENCE, ALTHOUGH WE'LL SEE SOME BRICK, BRICK, LATTICE WALLS, UM, ALONG THESE FIRST TWO BAYS ON THE SOUTH AND FIRST TWO BAYS ON THE NORTH AS WELL.
AND THEN, UM, I THINK WE'RE MISSING THE REST OF THE DRIVEWAY OUT TO THE ROAD, WHICH IS OVER HERE BETWEEN THESE TWO LINES HERE.
OH, ALSO TO NOTE IS THE LOCATION OF THE TRASH ENCLOSURE AND THE HPAC PLATFORM.
SO THEN THE FIRST FLOOR, UH, THE ENTRYWAY CONTINUES UP TO THIS, UM, FIRST FLOOR, SECOND FLOOR, I GUESS IT'S THE SECOND FLOOR REALLY, BECAUSE THE FIRST FLOOR WAS THE GARAGE, UH, AND THE ENTRANCEWAY IS OFF TO THE SIDE IS A SIDE ENTRANCE SIDE OF THE FRONT PORCH.
UH, AND THEN OTHERWISE FOR OUR REFERENCE, THERE IS A BACK, UH, PORCH ON THE SECOND FLOOR, AND THEN WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT FLOOR.
THIRD FLOOR ALSO HAS ANOTHER PORCH ON TOP OF THE PREVIOUS ONE.
UM, AND OTHERWISE, NO OTHER EXTRA ELEMENTS TO NOTE.
SO WE HAVE ON THE LEFT IS THE ACTUAL FRONT ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE CAN SEE THE ENTRY STAIRWAY ON THE LEFT, WHICH GOES TO A LANDING AT THIS HEIGHT, AND THEN CONTINUES UP IN THE SHADOWS.
SO TO SAY, UH, UP TO THE ACTUAL FIRST FLOOR UP HERE AT THIS, ALONG THIS DASH LINE HERE.
SO, UM, ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE IS THAT THE, UM, WHILE THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION, AS I NOTED, IS UP HERE AT THIS DASH LINE HERE, UH, TO THE SIDING HAS BEEN EXTENDED, UH, FAR BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR, UH, DOWN TO FIVE FOOT SEVEN AND A HALF INCHES, IF YOU INCLUDE THE TRIM BOARD, UM, FROM THE GROUND, UH, IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THAT FOUNDATION WALL, UH, AND YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE USING THE PIER AND, UH, INFILL, UH, PATTERN WITH THE INFILL BEING, UH, A HERRINGBONE PATTERN AND A DIAGONAL TRIM BORDER THEN ON THE REAR.
AND WE REALLY SHOULD GO TO THE SIDE OF THE FIRST, I'M GOING TO DO THE REAR FIRST.
UH, SO FROM THE REAR, UH, YOU CAN SEE THE TWO GARAGE DOORS ON THE BACK HALF OF THE FIRST FLOOR, UH, ALSO AN ENTRY DOOR.
AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE TWO PORCHES UP HERE.
UH, REMEMBER THEY HAD THAT NOTCH CUT OUT OF THAT RIGHT-HAND SIDE OR THE NORTHEASTERN CORNER.
UM, SO THIS, THIS PORTION WITH THIS GABLES OUT FARTHER, THE OTHER PORTION BEHIND IT, UH, LET'S SEE, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S THE DECORATIVE, UH, UM, WORK IN THE GABLE TIP OF THE GABLE ON BOTH THE FRONT AND THE REAR.
SO NOW WE'LL GO TO SIDE VIEW, AND THIS IS THE SIDE WHERE THE ENTRANCES ARE THE NORTH SIDE, AND HERE WE SEE THE STEPS GOING UP TO THAT LANDING.
I WAS MENTIONING, UH, LANDING BEING BEHIND THE FACE OF THE, UM, THE PACE OF THE BUILDING HERE SEVERAL FEET, AND THEN SMALL STEPS UP TO THE ACTUAL LANDING FOR THE DOORWAY.
UM, ALSO TO NOTE HERE IS THAT THIS RECTANGULAR AREA IS ACTUALLY AN OPENING, UH, INTO THE SPACE UNDERNEATH ALL OF THESE STEPS.
THEN THE, ON THE LEFT HERE, YOU CAN SEE THE LATTICE WORK I WAS POINTING OUT.
[01:30:01]
ON THIS ELEVATION, THEY'VE ALSO EXTENDED THE SIDING DOWN AS THEY DID ON THE FRONT.UM, BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE AGAIN IN THE DASH LINE HERE, THE SECOND DASH LINE HERE IS THE ACTUAL FLOOR LEVEL, WHICH IS NORMALLY WHERE THOSE, UH, THE SIDING STOPS KIND OF LIKE YOU'RE ON THE LEFT, UH, BUT THEY'VE EXTENDED IT DOWN TO REDUCE THAT HEIGHT OF THE FOUNDATION.
UM, AND A LITTLE BIT MORE HERE ON THE LEFT IS, UH, THE REST OF THE OPEN AREA, UH, UNDERNEATH THE FIRST LEVEL IS OPEN.
THESE WHITE AREAS ARE ACTUALLY OPEN, SO IT'S JUST FREESTANDING BRICK, PIERS, UH, UNDERNEATH THE PORCHES.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO, UH, INDICATED THEY WILL BE INTERESTED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THE, UM, MUNTINS FROM THE UPPER HALF OF THE WINDOWS SO THAT THE WINDOWS WOULD END UP BEING, UH, JUST ONE OVER ONE INSTEAD OF FOUR OVER ONE.
SO I TOOK CARE OF THAT FOR YOU, SIR.
SO, UH, NOW ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE STEPS ON THE LEFT THAT ARE ON THE FAR END OF THE HOUSE.
SO THE ACTUAL ELEVATION STARTS HERE AT THIS CORNER, AND YOU CAN SEE ON THIS ELEVATION, THEY'VE ALSO EXTENDED THE SIDING DOWN, UH, SEVERAL FEET, UH, ON THIS SIDE UNTIL IT REACHES THE LATTICE OPEN LATTICE WORK, THE BACK, UM, THIS HASN'T SHOWED US THE PENT ROOF OVER THE GARAGE ACCESS DOOR, AND WE DO HAVE TWO WINDOWS THAT ARE NOT VERTICAL OR SQUARE.
UM, I SUSPECT THAT WAS ONE OF THE CHANGES YOU'RE GOING TO SHOW US.
UM, AND OTHERWISE THE REST OF THE ELEVATION IS I GUESS, RELATIVELY CLEAR AND UNDERSTANDABLE.
SO, UM, THEN AT THE DESIGN REVIEW MEETING, YOU REQUESTED TO SEE THE KIND OF STREETSCAPE ALL OF THE HOUSES LINED UP.
SO THE SUBJECT HOUSE IS THIS ONE RIGHT HERE IN THE TOP CENTER, AND I THINK WE'VE SEEN THE DESIGN FOR THE ONE NEXT TO IT AND IS, WAS APPROVED.
UH, SO THAT ONE'S APPROVED, UH, THE ONE ON THE CORNER DOWN HERE ON THE RIGHT, UH, NEXT TO QUEENS, UH, QUEEN QUEENS POINT HAS ALSO BEEN APPROVED, I BELIEVE, RIGHT? YEAH.
UH, THIS ONE ON THE LEFT HAS BEEN PROPOSED, BUT I THINK MAYBE UNDER REVISION, UM, AND THEN DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT HOUSE, UM, IS THE EXISTING HOUSE THAT HAS THE THREE LEVELS OF BALCONIES THERE, THE BIG SQUARE BOX BUILDING.
UH, AND THAT'S THE, UH, ESSENTIALLY THE PROFILE OF THAT ONE.
SHE DOES NOT, OF COURSE HAVE A DRAWING OF THAT, BUT, UM, UH, THEN THE OTHER, UH, HOUSES THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED, AT LEAST IF NOT APPROVED FOR THAT OTHER SIDE, OR EVEN ARE NOW CONSTRUCTED, UM, ARE THESE OTHER THREE OVER HERE? AND THEN ON THE OTHER END, THIS, I DO KNOW THE TWO ON THE ENDS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED.
I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE, UH, OF THE OTHERS OF THESE TWO, WHICH ONE IS CONSTRUCTED.
SO THAT ONE'S BEEN CONSTRUCTED TO, SO BASICALLY THE TWO LEFT AND THE RIGHT AND THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PICTURE.
HAVE WE APPROVED THAT ONE? SO, YEP.
THERE'S YOUR, UM, KIND OF ELEVATIONS.
WE CAN ZOOM IN AND OUT OUT OF THAT IF YOU NEED TO.
UM, AND SHE WAS INCLUDED SOME PHOTOGRAPHS OF SOME OTHER SIMILAR HISTORIC BUILDINGS, UH, AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE AS WELL.
SO WE THEN HAVE OUR ZONING AND INSPECTIONS.
SO I'LL HAVE TO MAKE THE BIGGER, UH, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR SAYS THAT IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE ORDINANCE.
AND THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SAYS IT WILL, OF COURSE, NEED TO PAY A BUILDING PERMIT.
THEN WE'RE READY FOR RECOMMENDATIONS WHENEVER YOU ARE.
DO WE HAVE ANYBODY WHO HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR ANY ISSUES WITH THE APPLICATION AT THIS POINT, SEEING THAT MAY HAVE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE TO THE PRESENTATION? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SEE THIS, BUT I PUT
[01:35:01]
IT AROUND TOWN TODAY AND I LOOKED AT OTHER FOUNDATIONS AND HOW HIGH THEY WERE ABOVE THE STREET.AND IF THAT'S A CONCERN TO YOU ALL, I HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
I CAN PUT IT UP HERE ON THE PROJECTOR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, TO SEE THAT JUST IN RELATIONSHIP TO WHAT, UM, HOW HIGH IT IS.
AND, YOU KNOW, REALLY IN TRYING TO WORK THROUGH FOR US WAS A NEW PROBLEM, WHICH WAS TO HAVE THE GARAGE ON THE FIRST LEVEL WHILE STILL MAINTAINING A HOUSE FRONT.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T REALLY DONE THAT BEFORE MATT, CAN I PUT THIS? SO DO YOU WANT HER TO GO AHEAD AND SHOW US THAT NOW? OR I CAN JUST PASS IT AROUND TO YOU? Y'ALL WANT TO SEE THAT NOW, YOU KNOW, IN DISCUSSION THERE ARE YOU WEREN'T PASSING RAIL
HE CAN, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY
WE'LL HAVE TO ASK THAT QUESTION.
IS THERE A WAY YOU CAN ADJUST THE SCREEN? IT'S SO BLOWN UP THAT I DON'T GET A PICTURE.
UH, I DO NOT KNOW HOW I DO THAT.
THIS ONE IS NOT ONLY THEIR MAP AND YOUR SHARE, BUT THIS ONE IS NOT ON EITHER.
NO,
AND SO HOW, HOW TALL IS SHE, HOW TALL IS YOURS? IT'S, IT'S SEVEN FOOT SIX TO THE FIRST LANDING FROM GRADE.
AND, YOU KNOW, I DID BRING THE SITE, UM, WHICH HAS THE DIFFERENT GRADES AROUND, AND I KNOW THAT I, I'M KIND OF I'M USING A FLAT LINE IS GREAT, BUT THE REALITY IS IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN WHAT I HAVE DRAWN, JUST BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE A SLIGHT CHANGE IN GRADE, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY SIX INCHES OR SO.
SO, UM, IN MEASURING SEVEN 17 EAST FRONT STREET, WHICH IS THE NEW HOUSE, THAT LANDING IS, YOU KNOW, I'M TAKING A MINUTE, YOU HAVE JUST MEASURING IT TO, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE PLANTS ARE AND AT SEVEN FOOT SIX, AND THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE NEWER HOUSES, UH, BUILT.
AND THEN, UH, 5 0 5 EAST FRED STREET IS EIGHT FOOT EIGHT, UM, TO THEIR FIRST FLOOR LANDING.
AND, UH, ONE-ON-ONE EDGERTON, WE'VE GOT NINE FOOT AND 600 EDGERTON, 10, SIX.
SO I JUST WANTED TO JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MAKE A LANDING FOR THIS HOUSE SO THAT IT HAS STREET ACCESS WHILE NOT DOING, YOU KNOW, THIS, WHICH HAS THE GARAGE IN THE FRONT, WHICH WE CAN'T DO.
UM, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO THIS, TRYING TO SOLVE THE SAME PROBLEM WHERE YOU'RE PARKING UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE COMPLETELY, YOU KNOW, AS, AS EVERYONE DOES ON, ON EDGERTON, UM, OR EVEN, YOU KNOW, ON EAST FRONT STREET, THERE'S PARKING UNDERNEATH THIS FIRST FLOOR, BUT ALSO MAKING THAT LANDING ACCESSIBLE TO THE STREET, UM, AND BRINGING THAT FIRST LAMBING DOWN LOWER.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF AN ISSUE THAT IS FOR YOU, BUT THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS TRYING TO LOOK AT THE DESIGN OF THIS HOUSE.
AND SARAH, AM I REMEMBERING CORRECTLY THAT IN AN EARLIER RENDERING, YOU HAD THE WALL COMING DOWN FURTHER ON THE SIDE.
UM, IN OTHER WORDS, IT WAS EXTENDED BEYOND THE FOUNTAIN
[01:40:01]
WHERE THE ACTUAL FOUNDATION IS THE WALL, THE WALL, THE SIGNING.SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST FLOOR IS HERE, BUT WE'VE BROUGHT THE FIGHTING DOWN, YOU KNOW, SO FIVE FOOT, SEVEN KIND OF SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE BETWEEN WHAT'S BUILT OUT THERE RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THE, UM, THE BLUE HOUSE, WHICH IS 76, YOU KNOW, SO SOMEWHERE KIND OF IN THAT MID RANGE, HIGH ENOUGH.
SO IT STILL READS AS A FOUNDATION, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THAT, THAT WINDOW IN THERE.
SO IT HAS THIS THREE PRESIDENTS, BUT MASKING THE FACT THAT THERE'S AN ACTUAL GARAGE BEHIND THERE.
THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL YOU'D HAVE TO SAY RIGHT NOW.
SO, UH, THE, THERE IS NOBODY LEFT FOR OPPONENTS PROPONENTS, UM, REBA TOTALS.
THERE'S NO CITY STATE, ANYBODY ELSE LEFT OUT THERE.
SO I GUESS, SIR, WE'RE BACK TO YOU.
PATIENT TECHNOLOGY SO FAST THESE DAYS.
AND WE'LL ZOOM IN AND OFF THE PAGE.
SO THIS, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR KENT AND SHERRY LUCAS AND GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR EIGHT, 10 EAST FRONT STREET, UH, THERE IS NO HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME.
IT IS A VACANT PLOT AND THERE ARE NO NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY DESCRIPTIONS OR SANDBAG DESCRIPTIONS FOR AN EMPTY LOT.
EIGHT, 10 EAST FRONT STREET IS TO INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW INFILL HOUSE ON A VACANT PARCEL STEP SMITH'S FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, 2.1 0.12 AND THREE DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 2, 3, 4, AND FIVE FOR INFILL CONSTRUCTION, 3.4 0.12, THREE AND FOUR FOR FOUNDATIONS FOR 1.3, FOUR AND FIVE.
UM, I'VE INCLUDED AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE, UH, BASIC FLOOD ELEVATION FOR THE SITE.
UH, EIGHT, 10 EAST FRONT STREET IS INDICATED TO BE EIGHT FEET.
UH, AND TO NOTE THAT THE, UM, CITY REQUIREMENTS ARE TO ADD TWO FEET TO THAT FOR, UM, THE FLOOD REQUIREMENTS, GIVING YOU 10 FEET, 4.1 0.6, WALLS, TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.44 POINT, UH, WINDOWS, DOORS AND OPENINGS, 4.3 0.23 ENTRANCES 4.4 0.4 ROUTES 4.5 0.4 DECKS AND PATIOS 4.6 0.2 A MASONRY 5.1 0.3, FIVE AND SIX METAL'S 5.3 0.3 AND FOUR PAINT 5.4 0.23, FOUR, AND SIX.
SO THE STATEMENTS OF REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION 10 IN THE APPLICATION IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE.
THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE NARROW STITCH DEVELOPMENT PATTERN TO THE PROPOSAL IS AN
[01:45:01]
INFILL PROJECT THREE, DEPENDING ON THE INTERPRETATION OF GUIDELINES, 4.1 0.5.AND EXCEPT FOR THE SHAPE OF TWO WINDOWS, THE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MIGHT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF GUIDELINES FOR THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY AND FIVE.
THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRUENCE WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION EITHER CONTINUED THE APPLICATION UNTIL THE FLOOR ELEVATION CAN BE RECTIFIED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS GUIDELINES 4.1 0.5 OR APPROVE THIS APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW INFILL HOUSE ON A VACANT PARCEL ON CONDITION THAT THE SHAPE OF TWO WINDOWS BE CHANGED TO MEET GUIDELINE 4.3 0.2.
AND WHAT TO, WHEN DOES, OR YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THOSE TWO WINDOWS YOU TALKED ABOUT ON THE SIDE THAT ARE SQUARE.
THEN A RECTANGLE THAT ARE HORIZONTALLY RECTANGULAR.
SO WE'VE HAD YOUR INFORMATION.
SO ANY FINAL COMMENTS, MAN? HE WENT TO MAC, ARE THEY NOT SQUARE NOW? OH, OKAY.
AND ARE YOU THINKING OF TWO SQUARES NEXT TO EACH OTHER? OR YOU'RE THINKING JUST SQUARE ONE SQUARE ONE SQUARE.
SO WHAT QUESTIONS CONCERNS DO THE COMMISSION HAVE INDIA? AND PART OF WHAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH IS THESE TWO ITEMS HERE AT THE END.
UM, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE WINDOWS, UM, THIS ITEM THAT HAS TO DO WITH GUIDELINE 4.1 0.5.
CAN YOU BRING THAT GUIDELINE BACK UP 4.1? THIS HAS TO DO WITH HOW HIGH THE HOUSE COULD BE ELEVATED.
SO THE ISSUE IS AROUND THE ELEVATION OF TWO FEET ABOVE THE CURRENT HEIGHTS, RIGHT.
THAT'S THE REQUIREMENT, UM, WHICH WOULD BE 10 FEET AND THERE'S PROPOSING, I BELIEVE, 17 FEET.
SO IF WE LOOK AT THE ELEVATIONS, ALL RIGHT.
SO HERE WE HAVE, UH, IT'S EITHER SEVEN OR EIGHT FEET TO THE GRADE AND THEN FROM SEA LEVEL AND THEN 10 FEET TO THE CEILING.
UM, AND THEN, UM, I THINK, AND HER OTHER PARTS OF HER DRAWING, IT'S ONE FOOT, FOUR INCHES TO THE NEXT FLOOR.
SO IT'S 17, 18, 19 18 FOR TOTAL TO THE FLOOR LEVEL.
UM, NOW, UH, GENERALLY, UH, DEPENDING ON THE LOCATION OF THE DUCT WORK IN HOUSE, THE DUCT WORK ALSO HAS TO BE ABOVE THAT FLOOD LEVEL.
SO WE GENERALLY ALLOW ABOUT FOOT TWO FEET TO ALLOW FOR THE STRUCTURE.
AND THEN THE DUCT WORK UNDER THE STRUCTURE ON TOP OF THE ALREADY REQUIRED TWO FEET.
SO THAT WOULD LEAVE US AT 12 FEET APPROXIMATELY.
UM, NOW WE DON'T KNOW IF THERE'LL BE DUCT WORK AND MAYBE I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR MECHANICAL SYSTEM IS GOING TO BE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WHEN YOU SAY THOSE DIMENSIONS THAT'S FROM BMC LEVELS.
SO FOR THESE OTHER PROJECTS THAT YOU HAVE APPROVED, YOU KNOW, LIKE, LIKE THIS ONE OR ANY EDGERTON, THOSE ARE THE SAME DIMENSIONS.
YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE SHOWING 10 FOOT FROM GRADE, THERE'S STILL ANOTHER EIGHT FOOT TO MEAN SEA LEVEL.
SO THIS HOUSE IS NOT ANY HIGHER THAN, THAN ANY OF THESE HOUSES, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST FLOOR LEVEL IS, AND THAT GUIDELINE SPECIFICALLY, SO WE'RE RAISING A COUPLE OF THINGS.
ONE IS, UH, AT LEAST ONE OR TWO OF THOSE WERE BUILT WAY BEFORE FLOOD.
UM, THE OTHER ONES THAT ARE MORE MODERN, UH, THE FLOOD MAPS HAVE JUST RECENTLY BEEN CHANGED.
AND IN ONE CASE, AT LEAST I BELIEVE IT WAS BUILT, UM, INCORRECTLY OR BEFORE WE EVEN ESTABLISHED, FIRST OF ALL, UH, THE NEW GUIDELINES, UH, THAT, UM, BUILDING WAS, SHOULD NOT BE ELEVATED
[01:50:01]
ABOVE THE REQUIRED HEIGHT.SO ALL OF THEM KIND OF PREDATE OUR CURRENT GUIDELINE ON THE ONES THAT SHE'S SHOWING US, BECAUSE NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN BUILT IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS.
BUT, BUT THE, THE GUIDELINE WAS WRITTEN FOR ELEVATING HOUSES.
AS YOU KNOW, THIS, THE FLOOR LEVEL ON THIS HOUSE IS NO HIGHER THAN WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS IS THAT THAT 18 FLOOR IS FROM MEAN FEE LEVEL ZERO, THE GRAY HERE, THERE'S STILL ANOTHER EIGHT FOOT TO MEAN FEE LEVEL.
SO GROUND, WHAT'S THE ELEVATION OF THE GROUND.
LIKE ONE 10, IF THE GROUND IS WHAT MEAN IS FROM UNC LEVEL, UM, 11 FOR YEAR 11 FOR STARTING AT THE GROUND.
AND THEN YOU'RE ADDING TO THE VERY TOP OF THE LANDING, IS IT SEVEN, SIX? AND THAT'S WHY WE TRIED TO BRING THAT YEAH.
THE FIRST LANDING, THE FIRST LANDING TO BRING THAT DOWN SO THAT THAT'S COMPARABLE TO THE OTHER HOUSES SO THAT YOU COULDN'T REALLY TELL.
SO, I MEAN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, I MEAN, THAT'S ALL WELL AND GOOD, BUT, UM, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FLOOD DISTRICT FOR OUR FLOOD PLAIN ORDINANCE, UM, REQUIRES THAT A HOUSE BE HAVE THE FLOOR LEVEL, OR AT LEAST ALSO THE DUCT WORK ABOVE IN THIS CASE, 10 FEET ABOVE THAT'S ALL THEY CARE ABOUT HAS TO AT LEAST BE ABOVE 10 FEET, RIGHT.
SO IN THIS CASE, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, TWO FEET ABOVE GRADE.
UM, SO HOWEVER, UM, OUR, UH, GUIDELINES JUST BEEN TWO KIDS GRADES AT SEVEN FOOT.
SO WE'RE AT WE'RE AT NINE FOOT AND THEN PLUS THE TWO FOOT FREE BOARD AND THEN PLUS THE FLOOR STRUCTURE ON TOP OF THAT.
SO, UM, THE FLOOD PLAIN REQUIREMENT IS TO HAVE THE, EITHER THE FIRST FLOOR OR THE DUCT WORK, WHICH IS USUALLY UNDERNEATH THE FLOOR JOISTS ABOVE IN THIS CASE, 10 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL.
SO IF YOU ADD THE TWO FEET FOR A DUCT AND FLOOR JOYCE, THEN YOU'RE 12 FEET TO THE FIRST FLOOR.
THAT WOULD BE THE, IF THERE ARE DUCKS IN THE CEILING OF THE GARAGE, UM, THEN THAT WOULD BE THE HEIGHT.
THAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM HEIGHT FOR THE FLOOD ORDINANCE.
SO, AND AS FAR AS THE FLOOD ORDINANCE IS CONCERNED, YOU CAN GO TO 20, 30 PEOPLE WHO THEY DON'T CARE.
SO, UM, HOWEVER, THEREFORE OUR GUIDELINES HAVE SAID, WELL, WE DO CARE.
UM, AND WE ONLY WANT THEM AT THE REQUIRED HEIGHT.
SO EITHER THE DUCT WORK IS AT 10 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL, 11 FEET.
LET'S JUST CLARIFY THAT FOR A MINUTE.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE AT NINE FOOT ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL FOR THIS, FOR FLOOD.
AND THEN NEWBORN HAS IT TOO FOR THIS.
I JUST SHOWED THAT THIS IS THE FLOOD MAP, THAT BLUE MAP AND ALL RIGHT, SO THIS MAP HERE, THIS IS THE ACTUAL OFFICIAL FLOOD MAP.
UM, AND IT SHOWS WHERE THE YELLOW PIN IS, IS EIGHT, 10 EAST FRONT STREET AND THE BASE FLOOD.
IN FACT, THAT ENTIRE AREA OF THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION AND EVEN LABELS AT THERE E L EIGHT IS EIGHT FEET.
SO THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENT OF THE ORDINANCE IS THAT EVERYTHING BE ABOUT 10 FEET, EASY ENOUGH.
SO OUR GUIDELINES THEN HOWEVER, SAY TO LIMIT ELEVATION TO A MINIMUM HEIGHT REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE TO THE MINIMUM HEIGHT.
SO, HOWEVER, AS MS
[01:55:01]
LIMIT ELEVATION TO THE MINIMUM HEIGHT.SO SHE IS NOT ELEVATING A STRUCTURE.
SHE'S BUILDING THIS FIRST PROPOSING TO BUILD A STRUCTURE.
DO YOU AGREE THAT THAT'S THE CASE OR DOES THAT STILL, I MEAN, IS, IS THE INTENT OF THE GUIDELINES SUPPOSED TO INCLUDE NEW CONSTRUCTION? IS NEW CONSTRUCTION SUPPOSED TO BE ALLOWED TO GO WHATEVER HEIGHT THEY WANT? HAVE YOU GOT TWO QUESTIONS OR IS IT REALLY ONLY JUST ELEVATING FIRST QUESTION IS, DOES THIS MEET THE AT LEAST MINIMUM CLARIFYING THAT? OH YES.
SO SHE'S GOOD PACING NUMBER, NUMBER TWO, WHERE THE HOUSES THAT ARE, THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED THAT ARE NEXT DOOR OR DOWN THE STREET, DO THEY HAVE TO ADHERE TO THE SAME? LET'S CALL IT A NEW ORDINANCE.
IT'S IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS AS BEFORE I GOT HERE.
SO, SO, UM, ONCE PRIOR TO THIS, PRIOR TO THE NEW GUIDELINE DID NOT HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT.
SO IF WE IMPOSED THIS, WHAT IS THIS GOING TO DO TO THE AESTHETIC OF THE STREET? RIGHT? SO ALL OF THEM, HOWEVER, HAVE BEEN AT, OR CLOSE TO THAT.
ANYWAY, I HAVE A QUESTION TO TAG ONTO THAT.
THERE, THERE IS ALSO A SORT OF PART, B IS THE TOTAL ELEVATION OF THE HOMES ARE ALL AESTHETICALLY IN THAT RANGE.
AND SO WHEN WE SAY THAT A NEW HOME COULD GO ANY HEIGHT, THEY WANT, IT'S ALL RELATIVE TO THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE HOUSE.
SO I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMEBODY PUTTING A 20 FOOT FOUNDATION ON A HOUSE.
SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE MUCH HOME ABOVE THAT.
SO I FEEL LIKE THAT THERE'S A PART B TO IT.
IT'S THE MINIMUM THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
AND YOU'RE ALSO LOOKING AT AN OVERALL HEIGHT AND THAT OVERALL HEIGHT IS IN, UM, WITHIN THE OTHER HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED.
AND THERE'S ALSO BEEN STEPS TAKEN TO MITIGATE THE HEIGHT, THE VISUAL HEIGHT OF THAT.
SO I FEEL LIKE THAT BIGGER PICTURE IS PART OF THE DECISION.
AND, AND I THINK THAT THAT GUIDELINE IS IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR ELEVATING AN EXISTING STRUCTURE.
YOU KNOW, THIS, THE HOUSES DOWN ON EDGERTON THAT, YOU KNOW, REQUIRED THE GARAGE UNDER THE HOUSE.
I MEAN, THAT ORDINANCE WOULD THEN LIMIT WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED IN THOSE CASES, WHICH TO ME DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
BUT THAT WAS BUILT BEFORE THIS ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED BEFORE THIS ORDINANCE CAME ABOUT.
AND THAT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING, THAT THESE THINGS THAT YOU'RE SHOWING US WERE APPROVED BEFORE THIS ORDINANCE CAME ABOUT.
I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD HAVE NOT APPROVED THIS, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, RAISING IT REALLY HIGH UP IN THE AIR.
I UNDERSTAND THAT COMPLETELY, YOU KNOW, THE, BUT FOR SOMETHING THAT IS IN THE FLOOD PLAIN AND WANTS TO GET THE FIRST FLOOR, YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY OUT OF THE FLOOD, PLAIN, I MEAN, WE'VE GONE BY WATER OVER THE ORDINANCE AS WELL.
WE WOULD HAVE PAID ATTENTION TO THOSE, RIGHT.
BUT I THINK THE INTENT OF THAT ORDINANCE WHEN WRITTEN IS FOR, AS IT STATES IN THE ORDINANCE, ELEVATING STRUCTURES, MADAM CHAIRMAN, AND IN THE SPIRIT OF BEING HELPFUL, UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT INTENT.
UM, FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, A COURT WOULD LOOK AT THE PLAIN READING OF THE LAW, WHICH IN THIS CASE WOULD BE EITHER THE ORDINANCE OR THE SPECIFIC GUIDELINE.
AND AS 4.1 STATE WHEN ELEVATING A STRUCTURE IN FLOOD ZONES, IT'S THE FIRST PHRASE OF THE SENTENCE.
THEN IT PROCEEDS TO DISCUSS LIMITING ELEVATION.
SO I, I WOULD ENCOURAGE, UM, THE DELIBERATIONS TO FOCUS ON NOT SO MUCH THE INTENT, BUT THE PLAIN READING OF THE LAW AS WE HAVE IT IN THIS MOMENT.
AND WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A STRUCTURE TO BE ELEVATED.
WELL, YOU'RE ASKING TO HAVE A STRUCTURE BE PUT IN A FLOOD ZONE, BUT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A STRUCTURE TO BE ELEVATED.
AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS YOU ARE BECAUSE YOU ASKED ME THE BOTTOM LINE ON THIS THOUGH, IS AS YOU POINTED OUT THAT HOUSE, ISN'T GOING TO BE TALLER THAN THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE STREET.
AND WE'RE NOT AS, AS THE ATTORNEY HAS POINTED OUT, WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR A STRUCTURE.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A STRUCTURE TO BE ELEVATED.
AND, YOU KNOW, IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WERE SAYING WITH THAT, THAT IF THE PLAIN READING OF IT AND THIS HOUSE WILL, IT WILL BE WITHIN THE HEIGHT LIMIT OF THE ORDINANCE AS WELL.
[02:00:10]
OKAY.WHAT ELSE, WHAT OTHER DISCUSSION DO DO WE WANT TO HAVE? AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO IN THINKING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO HERE WITH THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE.
CAUSE WE NOT DONE THIS WITH ANY OTHER HOUSES.
SO IF YOU EVEN, THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR THE TREE SCAPE.
IF YOU PUT THIS HOUSE NEXT TO THE HOUSE, THE DECK TO IT, THE FIRST FLOOR IS ALL THE FIRST FLOOR WHEN YOU WALK IN THE DOOR, CORRECT? NO, GOSH.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER IS THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THIS IN SOME WAY, THAT WE'RE GOING TO SET A PRECEDENT FOR WHAT WE MIGHT DO WITH OTHER HOUSES.
SO I'VE JUST SAY, YOU NEED TO THINK ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF HOW YOU WANT TO LOOK AT THIS, BECAUSE YOU'RE ASKING FOR THIS FUCK FIRST FLOOR TO BE 18 FEET ABOVE GRAY, NO ABOVE SEA LEVEL, SORRY, ABOVE MAIN SEA LEVEL.
AND WE, AND THEY'RE NOT ANY, ARE THERE ANY OTHER HOUSES OUT THERE AND THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE THE FIRST FOUR IS 18 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL.
LOT ONE, WHICH IS IN THE V ZONE WAS, THAT'S NOT AN APPROVED, THAT'S NOT AN APPROVED PLAN.
AND, AND THAT HAS A DIFFERENT FLOW.
BUT, BUT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT FLOOD ZONE WILL REQUIRE IT TO BE AT THE SAME FLOOR HEIGHT AS THIS ONE.
WHEN THAT IT'S, IT'S SHOWN ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU SAY THE FLOOD LEVEL REQUIRES THIS HOUSE TO DO THAT WHEN THE REQUIREMENT IS SAYING THAT IT NEEDS TO BE, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MATT, THAT IT NEEDS TO BE 10 FOOT.
WHAT, 10 FOOT ABOVE SEA LEVEL.
AND YOU'RE WANTING TO PUT AN 18 FOOT OF BUDS, SO 10 FOOT TO THE UNDERNEATH OF THE FLOOR JOIST.
SO WE'VE GOT A 14 INCH FLOOR JOY UNDERNEATH THE DUCT WORK IF YOU HAVEN'T.
SO YOU KNOW, SO AT LEAST SO IT COULD BE TWO FEET.
IT COULD BE EITHER 10 OR 12 FEET TO THE FIRST FLOOR BY REQUIREMENTS AT MINIMUM 12 FOOT.
AND THEN LOT ONE, IF YOU WANT TO SCROLL ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE RIGHT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT AN APPROVED PLAN, BUT IT'S SHOWING THE HEIGHT AT WHICH THAT ONE WOULD BE, WHICH IS THE SAME HEIGHT AS THIS ONE.
SO THE ANSWER IS, THERE'S NOT ANOTHER HOUSE THAT'S THERE THAT HAS THE FIRST FLOOR TO THIS.
TH THERE IS ANOTHER, THERE ARE OTHER PROJECTS LIKE THE TOWNHOUSES ON THE CIRCLE HAVE THIS SAME QUESTION I'M ASKING YOU THAT.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S NOT ANOTHER HOUSE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA OF TOWN.
AND THIS LITTLE PROJECT HERE THAT HAS ALL OF THESE HOUSES THAT WE MADE THE SPECIAL, UH, KIND OF, UH, PLAN FOR ACTUALLY QUEEN'S POINT HAS THE SAME SITUATION BECAUSE ALL THEIR PARKING IS UNDERNEATH, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THAT'S NEXT DOOR, QUEENS, QUEENS POINT IS NEXT DOOR AND THERE IT'S NEXT DOOR, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS PRO PROJECT WHERE WE HAVE ALL OF THESE HOUSES ON THESE VERY SMALL LAW.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
THERE'S NOT ANOTHER HOUSE IN RIVER STATION IN THIS PROJECT, THIS PROJECT AREA THAT HAS, HAS A FIRST FLOOR THAT TALL.
DO YOU HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION? SO THE CURRENT APPROVED HOUSES AND CONSTRUCTED HOUSES ARE ON, OFF WATERFRONT FACING THE RIVER.
THIS IS, WOULD IT BE THE FIRST PROPOSAL FOR ON THE RIVER? NO.
SO THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IN THIS HOUSE IS THAT ON THE WATERFRONT, THE FIRST FLOOR IS YOU HA YOU'VE GOT THE GARAGE UNDERNEATH.
AND SO YOU'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH, GET TO THE GARAGE ON THE WATER SIDE.
IT WOULD BE THE FIRST HOUSE TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT WHATEVER IS PROPOSED.
THAT WOULD BE GOING ON THAT ALLEY ON THAT SIDE, WHICH TOP POP THE TOPOGRAPHY.
IF YOU KNOW THAT AREA, THAT AREA IS HIGHER THAN THE STREET WHERE THEY'RE GOING IN ON THE OTHER ALLEY.
SO MY POINT IS, IS THAT TOPOGRAPHY WISE, IF YOU HAVE A 47 FOOT HIGH HOUSE ON THIS SIDE OF THE STREET AND A 47, THIS SIDE OF THE STREET IS GOING TO SIT HIGHER BECAUSE THE
[02:05:01]
TOPOGRAPHY AND, AND THAT'S WHY WHEN I DID THESE ELEVATIONS, I, I ADJUSTED SOME THE FOOT DIFFERENCE SO THAT IT WOULD KIND OF EVEN OUT, BUT, BUT YET IT WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE LOT.ONE WOULD ALSO BE SIMILAR TO THIS ONE THAT FRAUGHT QUEENS POINT HAS THE SAME SITUATION.
THE TOWNHOUSES ON THE CIRCLE HAVE THE SAME SITUATION WHERE THE PARKING IS UNDERNEATH.
AND THE FIRST FLOOR ABOVE GRADE IS A FULL STORY ABOVE GRADE.
IT'S JUST, WE HAVEN'T DONE IT IN THIS DEVELOPMENT YET.
SO LOT FIVE HAS BEEN APPROVED, MAN.
UM, I DON'T REMEMBER THE MOST IS THAT, IS THAT A TWO OR THREE STORY HOUSE? AND THERE'S A GARAGE IN THE BACK.
IT JUST HAPPENS TO BE ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
SO TO SPEAK HALF OF THE FIRST FLOOR, IF THE GARAGE GOT IT, THE BACKPACK, AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE CASE FOR ALL OF THEM.
THIS IS THE FIRST ONE WE BROUGHT WHERE THEY JUST, THEY DIDN'T WANT ALL THAT EXTRA SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
AND YEAH, WHICH TO ME, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE A TWO-STORY HOUSE INSTEAD OF THE THREE STORY HOUSE.
LIKE THE OTHER ONES HAD TO BE WELL, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INTENT, IT'S LEAN IT'S.
IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE INTENT OF WHAT WAS WRITTEN IS TO KEEP THE HOUSES AS, AS, AS IT READS IS AT A CERTAIN HEIGHT.
SO FOR IT TO BE, UH, I THINK YOU SAID 10, 10 OR 12 FOOT HIGH FOR THE MAXIMUM, FOR THE FIRST FOUR, THAT, THAT THAT'S THE INTENT OF HOW THAT IS WRITTEN A HOUSE TO BE ELEVATED.
AS THE ATTORNEY HAVE POINTED OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT READING IT DIRECTLY, IF IT WERE TO BE ELEVATED WELL, SO, I MEAN, JUST TO BE FAIR, WE MAY NEED TO ADDRESS THIS, UM, IN THE UPDATES, GUIDELINES WORK GROUP, UH, BECAUSE THIS, ALL THIS ASIDE, THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER VACANT LOTS THROUGHOUT THE, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT COULD VERY WELL END UP WITH, UH, A HOUSE, UH, 17 FEET HIGHER AND BENNET IS REQUIRED TO BE, UM, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO KNOWS.
I MEAN, MY QUESTION WOULD BE, DOES IT LOOK OUT OF PLACE IN THE STREET SCAPE? YOU KNOW, IS IT WELL, IT CERTAINLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSE BESIDE IT, IT LOOKS DIFFERENT THAN THAT HOUSE.
NOT THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE DIFFERENCES, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY CLEAR THAT THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE YOU'RE PROPOSING IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE BESIDE YOU.
AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT IN THIS PROJECT HERE, THERE ARE NO OTHER HOUSES THAT HAVE THE FIRST FLOOR THIS HOT, AND THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT YOU PHOTOS OF OTHER HOUSES DOWNTOWN ALONG THE, AND THEN, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
I'VE DONE THAT IN THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT HERE IN THIS SPECIFIC GROUP OF HOUSES, WHICH IS WHY I ASKED YOU TO BRING THE S THE STREETSCAPE.
IT DOESN'T GO ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE STREETSCAPE IN TERMS OF WHERE THE FIRST IT DOES IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HIGH, BECAUSE IT HAS THAT OPPORTUNITY.
ALTHOUGH THE ONES ACROSS THE STREET, OR LOWER 13, 14, AND 16 APPROVED, THEY'RE ALL APPROVED.
THEY ARE TWO STORY WITH, UM, JUST A PORTION OF THE BACK BEING THE GARAGE.
SO THEY ARE, THIS HOUSE IS MORE SIMILAR TO THOSE.
IN FACT, IS THERE SOME REASON WHY YOU CAN'T LOWER THE FIRST FLOOR? SO IT'S, IT'S A DESIGN ISSUE.
SO YES, OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN LOWER THE FIRST FLOOR.
IT JUST MEANS THAT THEN YOU HAVE A THREE-STORY HOUSE.
SO IN THIS, IN THIS REGARD, THEY DIDN'T WANT ALL THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THEY WANTED A TWO STORY HOUSE, BUT IN ORDER TO GET PARKING UNDERNEATH, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE ONE OF,
[02:10:01]
YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE AN AREA FOR PARKING.AND IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THE AREA WHERE THERE'S PARKING, LIKE I'VE DONE IN THE OTHER ONES, THEY ONLY WANTED TWO STORIES.
THEY DIDN'T WANT THREE STORIES.
AND SO THAT THIS IS HOW WE SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.
UM, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, TO, TO ME, THE TWO-STORY HOUSE IS, I DON'T KNOW, TO ME, IT FITS IN ACTUALLY LOT FIVE THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO A DIFFERENT DESIGN.
SO I'M GOING TO BRING THAT ONE BACK THAT HAS A LITTLE BIT LOWER ROOF TO IT, BUT SO THERE'S A HOUSE NEXT TO IT.
NOT HAVE A GARAGE UNDERNEATH IT.
IT JUST HAS HALF OF THE BACK PORTION OF THE GARAGE AND THE FRONT HALF AS LIVING SPACE.
BUT THAT THEN REQUIRES YOU TO HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL FLOORS TO REALLY GET IN THE MASTER BEDROOM, BATHROOM, KITCHEN.
AND SO IN SOLVING THAT PROBLEM, WE TOOK OUT SOME OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND JUST MADE IT TWO STORIES ABOVE PARKING.
SO I WONDER AT THIS POINT, IF SOMEHOW OR ANOTHER, WE NEED TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION ABOUT, UM, AS, AS YOU, AS YOU TALKED ABOUT, ABOUT THIS, THIS ORDINANCE AND THIS, THIS REQUEST, IF WE NEED TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT BEFORE WE DECIDED ON SOMETHING, I'M NOT SURE WHAT INFORMATION YOU'D BE NEEDING.
WELL, I WAS THINKING THAT THE INFORMATION TO LOOK AT IS WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS SITUATION, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T GO ALONG WITH THAT WE COULD DO IS CHANGE THE BALL.
AND YOU THINK THAT WE COULD DO CHAIRMAN QUESTION.
I THINK THAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT EVERYBODY HAS TO, WHATEVER, WHAT EMOTION MIGHT PRODUCE IN THIS.
MATT, CAN YOU SCROLL BACK TO THE CONDITIONS AGAIN ON, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE, THERE WERE TWO NOT CONDITIONS.
I SHOULD MAKE A BIGGER, SINCE WE'RE SHARING.
DO, DO YOUR CONDITIONS GO AWAY WITH THE INTERPRETATIONS, THE LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THE INTENT OF THE HYPE, RIGHT? IT'S EITHER WE WERE SUGGESTING EITHER GO WITH BULLET ONE OR GO WITH BULLET TWO.
SO BULLET ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE PERCEIVED, IF THAT'S THE RIGHT WORD, UM, CODE INTERPRETATION, RIGHT? NUMBER TWO IS AESTHETIC.
IS THAT, IS THAT, AM I, AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY? SO ESSENTIALLY IT'S THE CHOICE BETWEEN WHETHER OR NOT YOU BELIEVE THAT THE GUIDELINE DOES APPLY TO THIS CASE, THEN THAT WOULD BE BULLET ONE.
IF THE GUIDELINE DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS CASE, THAT WOULD BE BULLET TWO.
THAT'S JUST, AND THERE'S PROBABLY NUANCES IN BETWEEN, BUT THOSE WOULD BE TWO CLEAR OPTIONS.
SO I DO HAVE A QUESTION, IS IT, AND THIS IS FOR THE, FOR THE COMMISSIONER, MAYBE I'M OUT OF WAR HERE.
I AM TELLING ME OUT, CAUSE I'M GOING TO, IS, IS THE, IS THE, IS THE OPPOSITION ON THE CODE OR IS IT THE AESTHETIC OF THE FACT THAT YOU'VE GOT A SECOND FLOOR ENTRY, SO TO SPEAK? THAT'S THE QUESTION I'VE GOT? CAUSE I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S LIFTED THAT WAY AND WHY THEY WANT THAT.
I GOT THAT IS THE ISSUE CODE, IS IT OR SECOND FLOOR? I ALSO WANT TO TAG ON TO YOU, JOHN, IF, IF WE WERE TRYING TO FIT A SQUARE PEG INTO A ROUND HOLE HERE, I REALLY FEEL LIKE THAT.
THEN WE NEED A CODE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
WE HAVE A CODE FOR ELEVATING EXISTING STRUCTURE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ONE FOR NEW.
AND SO WE EITHER CONTINUE UNTIL WE HAVE CODES THAT APPLY TO THIS CASE, OR WE HAVE TO MAKE A JUDGMENT BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE.
I HAVE GOT ONS FOR INBUILT CONSTRUCTION.
THE 3.4 IS INBUILT CONSTRUCTION.
AND SO IF THAT'S THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, ALL THE OTHER GUIDELINES ESSENTIALLY WILL KILL FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES, BUT YOU USE THEM TO APPLY WHEN YOU'RE DOING NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT THE THREE, WE HAVE GUIDELINES FOR INFILL CONSTRUCTION.
UH, WHAT WERE THEY TALKING SPECIFICALLY?
[02:15:01]
YOU KNOW, IN THAT WAY, TO ME, THAT'S, THAT'S BRINGING THAT ENTRY LEVEL SIMILAR TO OTHER HOUSES, YOU KNOW, ON THE STREET.UM, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT HAVING IT BE TAUGHT, YOU KNOW, MUCH TALLER OR OUT OF PROPORTION IN THE HEIGHT OF IT.
AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL, BUT YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO DO THOSE THINGS IN ORDER TO MAKE IT, UM, CUT FIT IN THOSE GUIDELINES AND MAKE IT ACCEPTABLE.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS THAT, THAT YOU ALL WERE SUGGESTION WAS TO EITHER CONTINUE THIS, TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE OF THIS GUIDELINE OR TO ACCEPT IT AND FIX THE TWO WINDOWS.
SO THE CONTINUING WOULD BE TO ALLOW THEM TO REVISE THE DESIGN, TO ACCOMMODATE THE INTERPRETATION THAT THE GUIDELINE DOES AND DOES APPLY TO THIS CASE.
IF YOU PICK ONE, WE WILL HAVE TO REVIVE THE DESIGN TO INCLUDE A FIRST FLOOR AT THE GARAGE LEVEL.
AND IF YOU APPROVE TO THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'LL CHANGE THE WINDOWS TO SQUARE AND IT CAN STAY AS IT IS WELL, THAT'S WHY I ASKED, ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT, IS, IS THERE SOME WAY FOR YOU TO LOWER THE FIRST FLOOR? I MEAN, YOU HAVE MORE CEILING ON THE FIRST FLOOR, BUT NOT NECESSARILY HAVE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I HAVE CLIENT WHO ASKED US TO DESIGN SOMETHING IN THIS MANNER THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE TO THE GUIDELINES.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT I HAVE DONE MY BEST TO DO.
AND INTERPRETING THE GUIDELINES FOR ENTRIES, FOR HEIGHT, FOR SCALE AND MASS, YOU KNOW, THAT, TO ME, IT MEETS THOSE GUIDELINES FOR WHAT THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR WHAT THAT HOUSE IS.
SO CAN I, CAN I MAKE IT ALL ONE FLOOR INSIDE? SURE.
I MEAN, I CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT ME TO DO, BUT THIS IS WHAT THEY HAVE TASKED ME WITH DOING, AND IT'S MY JOB TO TAKE THE GUIDELINES AND INTERPRET THEM AND GIVE THEM TO YOU IN A DESIGN.
THEN OUR JOB IS TO INTERPRET OUR GUIDELINES AS WELL.
AND THAT WAS WHY I WAS TRYING TO FIND SOMEPLACE IN BETWEEN DEALING WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN TERMS OF THE GUIDELINE TO, I, I, I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK AND LISTENING TO THE ATTORNEY AGAIN, YOU KNOW, STATE THE MATTER OF FACTNESS OF THE WORDING, I DON'T THINK IT APPLIES TO THIS PROJECT.
SO I, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT IN THAT VEIN OF FINDING A COMMON GROUND BETWEEN THE TWO IS, I THINK SHE'S DONE THAT WITH THE DESIGN IN THE FACT THAT SHE DIDN'T NEED TO EXTEND THE SIDING DOWN AS FAR AS SHE DID.
WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT SHE HAS TO DO THAT? AND THAT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE.
SHE ADDED THE, UH, LANDING IN THE STAIRS, UM, BECAUSE SHE REALIZED IT WAS GOING TO BE 17 FEET OF STAIRS, UM, COMING STRAIGHT DOWN FROM, UH, FROM A FIRST, FROM THAT SECOND FLOOR, ESSENTIALLY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE SIDEWALK.
UH, AND BY BREAKING THAT UP AT WHAT WOULD VISUALLY PERHAPS BE A FIRST FLOOR, IT IS THEN ALSO SOMEWHAT HELPFUL.
SO I THINK, UM, WORST CASE SCENARIO, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE HAPPEN IS SHE COULD HAVE ENDED UP WITH 11 FEET OF FOUNDATION BRICK THERE AND, UH, STAIRWAY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE, TO THE GROUND.
UM, SO I THINK MAYBE SHE'S FOUND A, UM, UM, A COMPROMISE POSITION WITH THE DESIGN.
AND MIGHT I ADD MADAM CHAIR? IT APPEARS TO ME IN LISTENING TO THE CONVERSATION THAT THE MEMBERS ARE GRAPPLING WITH, WHAT, WHAT IS IT 4.1 0.5 MEANS WE KNOW WHAT IT SAYS, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT MEANS.
AND IT MAY BE THAT YOU NEED TO RUMINATE THAT YOU NEED TO READ RESEARCH, MAYBE GO BACK TO PAST MINUTES, WHATEVER YOU HAVE TO DO TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LANGUAGE MEANS.
AND IT MAY BE THAT THIS SETTING AT THIS TIME IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO DOING THAT.
SO IT MAY BE, YOU KNOW, NOT TRYING TO ADD ADDITIONAL BULLET POINTS, BUT SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH APPLYING THIS GUIDELINE, AS IT SHOULD BE APPLIED, YOU COULD CONTINUE CONSIDERATION FOR THE APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF THE COA TO YOUR NEXT REGULAR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING.
[02:20:01]
ABOUT HOW TO INTERPRET THAT PARTICULAR GUIDELINE AND THEN RESUME THE CONVERSATION.ONCE YOU'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT HOW TO APPLY THAT PARTICULAR GUIDELINE, AND WE COULD DISCUSS IT THEN AT THE INTERVENING WORK SESSION AS JUST A COMMISSION.
WE COULD, WE COULD BRING UP THIS TOPIC AND HAVE PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT WORK SESSION.
WELL, SO IF, IF WHAT IF, IF WE WANTED TO DO WHAT YOUR SUGGESTION, WE WOULD NEED A MOTION TO, IN A SENSE, THE FIRST OPTION HERE TO CONTINUE THE APPLICATION, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD NEED ANY MOTION TO CONTINUE THE APPLICATION TO A DATE AND TIME AND PLACE.
AND I THINK MR. BLACKWOOD HAS A COMMENT FOR A SPECIFIC REVIEW, WHICH WOULD BE TO, UH, RECTIFY IT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS.
I WANT TO UNDERSTAND TO BETTER, UH, FOR ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE REQUIREMENTS OF FOREIGNERS.
THAT WOULD BE OUR REASON FOR THAT.
DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, ONE MORE STUPID QUESTION.
SO IF, IF, IF WE, FOR WHATEVER REASON, UM, HOWEVER, THIS HAPPENS AND WE DO APPROVE THIS DESIGN AND LATER WE INTERPRET THIS DIFFERENTLY.
HAVE WE SET PRECEDENT AND ONLY IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THEM TO COME BACK AND SAY, WELL, YOU PROVED THAT LOT.
THAT'S CERTAINLY, I THINK THE QUESTION IS DIRECTED AT ME.
I THINK THERE'S CERTAINLY AN ARGUMENT THAT A LATER PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT COULD MAKE.
WE ALSO HAVE TO BALANCE THAT WITH, IF THIS COMMISSION WERE TO DENY ANY COA, NOT TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY, YOU WOULD HAVE TO ARTICULATE AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD BY WHICH THIS APPLICATION FAILS TO MEET OUR GUIDELINES.
AND IN MAKING THAT DECLARATION, IT NEEDS TO BE WELL-ROUNDED IN FACT, AND LAW.
SO THERE'S A TENSION BETWEEN THOSE TWO NOTIONS, MAKING SURE THAT YOU SET AN APPROPRIATE PRECEDENT AND ALSO APPLYING THE FACTS AND LAW, AND THEY EXIST IN THIS MOMENT CORRECTLY.
UM, AND THAT MAY TAKE SOME ADDITIONAL DELIBERATELY, AND THAT COULD BE MUCH MORE CLEARLY STATED IF WE COULD JUST SEE A DRAWING OF POSSIBLE HOUSES AT THIS LEVEL, AND THEN ONE HOUSE AT THE LEVEL YOU WERE PROPOSING, WE COULD SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN IT COMES TOGETHER.
UM, AT THE, YOU MEAN THE ELEVATION OF THE STREET? YEAH.
I DON'T MEAN A WHOLE HOUSE I'M USED TO BE, THIS IS THE, THIS IS THE HOUSE LINE AT THE CURRENT, AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT RUTH IS CONCERNED ABOUT.
IF WE COULD JUST SEE HERE GOES THIS ONE AND HERE'S THIS ONE, AND DOES IT LOOK THAT BAD? WELL, THAT'S WHAT I SHOULD UP THERE.
AND I DON'T THINK IT LOOKS BAD AT ALL.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT I'VE DONE IT SO THAT IT'S, IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS IN LINE WITH ALL THE OTHER HOUSES.
AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS MY POINT WAS THAT THIS, THIS GUIDELINE IS FOR ELEVATING HOUSES.
IT'S NOT FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, I'VE DESIGNED THIS SO THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THE FLOOR LEVEL IS LOWER SO THAT IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE OTHER HOUSES AROUND.
AND SO I DON'T THINK IT, UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT IT, I DON'T THINK IT APPEARS OUT OF PLACE OR RIDICULOUS.
YOU KNOW, ALL THE HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET ARE TWO STORY.
YOU KNOW, THE ONE NEXT TO IT, I'M GOING TO BRING BACK DIFFERENTLY THAN THIS AND IT WILL BE TWO AND A HALF STORY.
I THINK THAT, TO ME, THIS IS A BETTER SCENARIO FOR THESE HOUSES ON THIS SIDE OF THE STREET.
JUST LIKE THE PROBLEM WAS SOLVED ON EDGERTON.
THIS IS THE SAME PROBLEM THAT EXISTS ON EDGERTON, WHERE YOU'RE DRIVING IN UNDERNEATH.
AND THEN THEY'VE GOT TWO STORIES OF HOW ABOVE THAT THIS IS THE EXACT SAME SCENARIO.
IF IT'S JUST THAT THE FRONT FACADE DOES NOT HAVE A GARAGE ENTRY IN IT, LIKE THOSE DO, IT HAS A REAR GARAGE ENTRY.
SO THE FRONT FACADE NEEDS TO LOOK MORE LIKE THE STREETSCAPE, BUT IT'S SOLVING THE SAME PROBLEM OF PARKING UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE WITH TWO STORIES ABOVE.
SO BEFORE, WHEN WE WERE IN THE SITUATION OF THIS NEW LAND OVER THERE, AND YOU KNOW, THAT WE HAD TO TAKE SOME TIME TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ACCOMMODATE THESE HOUSES THAT WERE GOING TO HAVE GARAGES ATTACHED TO THEM.
AND WE HAD TO TAKE A MONTH OR SO TO ACTUALLY WRITE A WHOLE NOTHER SECTION,
[02:25:01]
WHICH OUR STEAM COLLEAGUE HERE WROTE A SECTION TO ACCOMMODATE THESE HOUSES AS YOU WANTED TO BUILD THEM.SO PERHAPS THIS WOULD BE ANOTHER TIME.
AND ANOTHER SITUATION THAT WE HAVE WE'VE COME UP WITH WITH THESE HOUSES, COULD, COULD WE NOT TAKE A MONTH FOR US? AND I'M NOT SAYING DON'T, YOU KNOW, YOU WERE ABOUT TO MAKE A MOTION.
SO I I'M JUST SAYING YOU COULD, WE COULD, WE, COULD WE NOT TAKE A MONTH TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION AND EVERYBODY BE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT DECISION THEY WANT TO MAKE ABOUT THIS? BECAUSE THIS, THIS HOUSE DOESN'T HAVE TO START TO BE IN CONSTRUCTION IN THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS.
DOES IT? I WOULD, BUT NO, IT DOESN'T SO GOOD.
WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, TO DO AS OUR, UH, STEAMED THOUGHT LAWYER SUGGESTED TO CONTINUE, UM, THIS APPLICATION, UH, FOR ONE MONTH.
SO WE NEED TO PUT THE DATE THE TIME, AND THAT WOULD BE NOVEMBER THE 17TH, UM, AT FIVE 30 IN THE SECOND FLOOR COURTROOM OF CITY HALL TO, DID YOU SAY GATHER MORE INFORMATION TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION TO INFORM THE DISCUSSION AND DECISION-MAKING AS IT RELATES TO THIS APPLICATION.
WHAT'S SOMEBODY WILLING TO MAKE A, UH, A MOTION FOR THAT.
CAN YOU PUT UP SOUTH ELEVATION PLEASE? WHILE WE'RE THINKING MUST, MUST BE THE OTHER SIDE THEN THE NORTH, WHAT? WANT THE FRONT TO THE LEFT OF THE RIGHT.
I MEAN, THAT WAS THE OTHER SOLUTION.
IF YOU CAN BRING THE FRONT DOOR TO ABOVE WHERE I'VE GOT THAT LANDING, THE STEPS INSIDE THE HOUSE AND PUT THE STEPS INSIDE THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, AND THAT, THAT WOULD THEN, SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN AN UNFORTUNATE PREDICAMENT FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, I HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH YOU ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE GUIDELINE.
BUT ALSO HAPPENED TO AGREE THAT THE FRONT DOOR IS LEVITATING UP IN THE AIR.
AND SO IT'S KIND OF MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR ME TO PARTICIPATE IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.
SO IF YOU COULD FIND THAT FRONT DOOR ENCLOSURE DOWN SOMEWHERE WHERE EVERYBODY'S BEEN TALKING ABOUT, I BET YOU'LL LEAVE HERE TONIGHT WITH SOME PAPERWORK.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S POSSIBLE TO DO, AND I LOOKED AT DOING THAT TO BRING THAT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE, AND IT MAY BE COMPLICATED ENOUGH.
WE DON'T WANT TO JUST TALK ABOUT IT.
YOU MAY WANT TO ACTUALLY EXPERIMENT A LITTLE BIT BEFORE ANYWAY, BUT SO YOU'RE OKAY.
WITHIN 30 DAYS, YOU'RE OKAY WITH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT YOU ALL ARE GOING TO REQUIRE THAT AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THERE'S, THESE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY READY TO GO, BUT NO, THEY WON'T.
SO, SO COULD WE HAVE A MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE OF THIS TILL THEN TO THE NEXT MEETING IN WHICH WE CAN GO FOR MY, MAYBE WITH THAT GUIDELINE AND PERHAPS YOU COULD BRING US SOMETHING ELSE THAT WOULD BOOST, UNLESS YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT A CONDITION THAT WE BRING THE FRONT DOOR DOWN TO WHERE THE LANDING IS, AND THAT WOULD SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM.
ARE YOU REALLY WILLING TO DO THAT THOUGH? I DON'T.
I DON'T THINK IT, I MEAN, IT'S UP TO YOU GUYS.
THAT WAS PART OF RUNNING THROUGH THIS WHOLE DESIGN PROCESS.
AND IN THE END, I JUST, THE STAIRS
[02:30:01]
WERE COMPLICATED AND NOW IF I PUT IT UP IN THE AIR, IT JUST SEEMED TO MAKE MORE SENSE.BUT THE, THE TRUTH OF IT IS YOU CAN HAVE A FRONT DOOR THERE.
IT JUST, IT MEANS YOU WOULDN'T HAVE MUCH OF A FRONT PORCH NECESSARILY, BUT I MIGHT BE ABLE TO I'D HAVE TO CHANGE IT AROUND A LITTLE BIT.
I WAS TRYING TO GET THE FRONT OF MY FLOOR.
I, I MOVED, I MOVED THAT WE CONTINUE THE APPLICATION FOR EIGHT, 10, THESE FRONT STREET TO NOVEMBER 17.
I BELIEVE 17, UM, UH, AT CITY HALL AT 5:30 PM IN THE COURTROOM TO ALLOW US TO, UH, GATHER MORE INFORMATION ON INTERPRETATION OF GUIDELINES AS IT RELATES TO THE APPLICATION AND ALSO TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO EXPLORE AN IDEA THAT HAS JUST RECENTLY BEEN EXPOSED TO, IS THAT IN THE RIGHT FORMAT? ABSOLUTELY.
SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
WE WILL CONTINUE THIS TILL NOVEMBER THE SEVENTH.
I REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOU ALL WORKING WITH YOU ALL HAVE BEEN MORE THAN GENEROUS.
SO WE NEED TO BE SURE AND PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT, UH, DESIGN AND HALF, HALF HER HAVE HER COME BACK TO THE DESIGN REVIEW WITH THE, HER RENDITIONS OF WHATEVER SHE'S GOING TO BE POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS.
WELL THAT, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, I APOLOGIZE FOR OPENING THAT CAN OF WORMS, BUT I THINK IN THE END, YES, BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO COME UP AGAIN.
SO, AND THAT'S WHY I SAID, WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL WHAT WE DO HERE, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO COME UP AGAIN.
SO WE NEED TO BE SURE WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.
I REALLY FEEL LIKE THAT WE NEED SPECIFIC GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
WE DO HAVE SPECIFIC GUIDELINES, BUT YOU DID SAY AS LONG AS IT'S CON CONGRUENCE WITH THE INFILL AROUND IT, WHICH IS IT IS, BUT WE'RE STILL POINTING OUT AREAS THAT ARE CLEAR IN OUR GUIDELINES.
WELL, THIS IS A NEW GUIDELINE THAT WASN'T, I, I LIKE TO HAVE A MOMENT TO, YOU KNOW, SO I, AND I'M PART OF THE COMMISSION AND I FEEL LIKE THAT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE, WE'VE GOT HOLES AND, AND THIS IS WHY WE'RE DEALING WITH INTERPRETATION BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT, THAT LANGUAGE YET.
SO, OH, BUSINESS, WE DON'T, WE STILL DON'T HAVE NONE.
WE STILL HAVE NONE FOR ALL BUSINESS.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC LABS, SO WE HAVE NO COMMENTS FROM THEM.
[7. New Business: 2022 Calendar of HPC meetings]
THE CALENDAR.WOULD YOU ALL HAVE A DRAFT OF, I THINK IF EVERYBODY HAVE A COPY OF THAT, DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE BREATH CALENDARS? EVERYBODY GOT A COPY OF THE DRAFT FOR US TO APPROVE THIS FOR NEXT YEAR.
UH, IT HAS IT ON THE SCREEN AS WELL.
SO HE HAS THE DESIGN REVIEW AND OFFICIAL MEETING FOR EACH MONTH, EXCEPT FOR DECEMBER.
AND WE DON'T HAVE A DECEMBER MEETING THIS YEAR EITHER.
SO, UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE A DISCUSSION THAT THEY NEED TO MAKE ABOUT THAT? OKAY.
CAN WE, WE NEED TO HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT.
YOU ALL JUST GOT IT LIKE AN HOUR BEFORE OR EVEN AT YOUR DESK.
SO, UM, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A FEW MINUTES OR WHATEVER TO, BUT I CHECKED, UM, ALL OF THE DATES TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY, ANY HOLIDAY ON ANY OF THOSE DAYS.
UM, NOW NOVEMBER 16TH, I DON'T BELIEVE IS EVEN THE WEDNESDAY BEFORE THANKSGIVING.
SO, UH, BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE THE FOLLOWING WEEK.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY ONE THAT WOULD BE EVEN CLOSE TO A HOLIDAY.
BUT JULY 4TH OBVIOUSLY IS, UH, TWO DAYS BEFORE JULY 6TH.
CAN WE, WE NEED A MOTION TO PASS THIS, RIGHT.
WELL, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO PASS IT UNTIL, UM, THE NOVEMBER MEETING, BUT IF YOU ARE READY TO PASS IT THIS EVENING, GO FOR IT.
AND THAT WAY PEOPLE CAN BEGIN PLANNING FOR NEXT YEAR, EVEN INCLUDING JANUARY AND FEBRUARY, THAT WE WOULDN'T OTHERWISE NECESSARILY.
THAT WE ADOPT THE 2022 SCHEDULE AS PROPOSED.
DO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND.
WE HAVE SEVERAL SECONDS TO CHOOSE ONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
[02:35:01]
THE MOTION PASSES.[8.A. Report on CoAs Issued 9/8/2021 – 10/11/2021 MAJORS and AMENDMENTS:]
IS THE ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT AND HERE'S REPORT ON GOES TO THE BACK PAGE OR MAJORS AND, UM, UM, MIN-MAX THAT, THAT WERE DONE.UM, NUMBER ONE AND TWO ON EACH FRONT STREET AND THE MONITORS, YOU'RE THE MINORS THAT, UM, ARE THEY, ARE THESE THINGS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY DONE? SO YOU GOT SOME OF THIS TAKEN CARE OF GOOD FOR YOU.
THOSE 14 WERE DONE IN THE PAST.
UM, NEVER BE REPORT ON THE COH TENSIONS ISSUED SINCE THE PRIOR REGULAR MEETING THERE.
UM, ARE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS OR UPDATES? DO WE HAVE ANY GROUPS THAT, THAT GROUPS IS THE RIGHT WORD, RIGHT COMMITTEE ROOMS, UM, THAT WE NEED TO MEET.
I CAN MAKE A, UH, UH, A REPORT THAT THE, UH, UH, AWARDS COMMITTEE WILL BE, WILL HAVE MET BY THE TIME.
UM, WE HAVE OUR NEXT MEETING AND I'LL HAVE A REPORT THEN I'LL GET TOGETHER WITH THE TWO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS HAVE, WE WON'T HAVE A MEETING AND GIVE YOU A REPORT.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE GROUPS THAT WE GOT THROUGH ANY OF THE OTHER GROUPS, CHAIRPERSONS, HEAD PERSONS, WHATEVER THEY'RE CALLED IN THE GROUP.
DOES ANYONE HAVE EVER HAVE A REPORT? I SEE WE HAVE NO REPORT, NO REPORTS.
DO I HEAR A MOTION FOR US TO ADJOURN? WE HAVE A SECOND.