[00:00:02]
[1. Opening of Meeting with Roll Call]
THE REPORTED HOUR WE ARE CALLED TO, OR SORRY, COULD I HAVE A LOCAL CERTAINLY, UM, COMMISSIONER STONE, COMMISSIONER, SHERIDAN COMMISSIONER, BLACK FOLDER HERE.MR. BROADWAY, VICE CHAIR, YOUR CHAIR COX, UH, COMMISSIONER BISBY IS ABSENT, UH, COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN AND COMMISSIONER BRYANT PRESENT.
WE HAVE A FORM SO WE CAN DISPENSE WITH THAT.
[3.A. Hearings: Introduction, Swearing-In, Summary of Process]
COMMISSION IS A PUBLIC COMMISSION APPOINTED BY THE CITY OF NEW HAVEN BOARD OF ALDERMAN.IT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESERVING AND SAFEGUARDING NEWBORNS LOCALLY, DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICTS, DOWNTOWN AND RIVERSIDE BASED ON U S DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR STANDARDS, STATE STATUTES, CITY ORDINANCES, AND NEW BURNED HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
TWO OF THE MAJOR TASKS OF THE HPC INCLUDES APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND PREVENTING DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES.
DUE TO NEGLECT THE HPC HOSTS, A KWANZAA JUDICIAL HEARING ON AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THE COMMISSION HERE, SWORN TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT BY PARTY TO RECEIVE 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 CAN NOT BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO SPECIFIC HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
LIKEWISE CONDITIONER SHALL REFRAIN FROM STATING PERSONAL OPINION.
PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES ARE HEARSAY DURING THE HERE.
THE COMMISSIONER'S DECISION ON AN APPLICATION IS BASED SLOWLY ON TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT A HEARING THAT DIRECTLY RELATE TO THIS DORK GUIDELINES.
SO IF WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE TO IS GOING TO TESTIFY TONIGHT, YOU NEED TO COME FORWARD AND BE SWORN IN.
UM, GOOD FOR THE HEARING PROCESS.
THE ACC COMMISSIONER PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT, OR A REPRESENTATIVE PRESENTS THE APPLICATION PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WHO RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE HEARING CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.
REBUTTAL IS ALLOWED BY THE ETHICON AND BY PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WHO RECEIVED NOTICE OTHERS, KA OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAVE RELEVANT INFORMATION AND WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED, CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.
THE HPC ADMINISTRATOR PRESENTS THE STAFF FIVE INTO THE RECOMMENDATIONS THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE FINAL COMMENT ON THEIR APPLICATION.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSS THE EVIDENCE AND THEY ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION FROM THE ADVOCATES.
ARE THERE REPRESENTED THE CHAIRPERSON CALLS FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE OR DENY? THE APPLICATION WAS STATED FIVE, A FIVE.
THE MOTION IS DISCUSSED BY THE COMMISSION.
THE CHAIRPERSON CALLS FOR A VOTE ON THE MOTION BY THE COMMISSION.
A COA CAN BE APPROVED, APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ARE DENIED.
SO WE WILL GO TO OUR APPLICATIONS.
AND LET ME JUST BRING YOU UP TO DATE ON WHERE WE ARE.
SO UNDER APPLICATIONS WITH YOUR THREE BIG 3 0 2 BROAD STREET HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.
SEVEN 20 PAWLAK STREET HAS ASKED TO BE CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT DUE TO NO INFORMATION ON THE FRONT PORCH AND AGE 16 EAST FRONT STREET HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.
SO THE ONE THAT WE HAVE IS 3 0 1 JOHNSON STREET, AND THEN WE WILL MAKE
[00:05:01]
A MOTION TO CONTINUE SEVEN 20 PARK STREET.SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT WE WILL DO UNDER APPLICATIONS.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE OR YOU HAVE TO ADD TO THAT? NO, JUST THAT A SO IF ANYONE IS HERE RELEVANT TO THE TWO WITHDRAWN APPLICATIONS, UH, THERE WILL BE NO DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT EITHER OF THOSE THIS EVENING, BUT YOU'RE FREE TO SAY LISTEN TO THE OTHERS.
[3.C. 301 Johnson St. – to include the installation of 6-foot-high metal gates for the driveway and two pedestrian entries in the Primary AVC.]
WE START WITH THE FIRST , UH, APPLICATION THAT WE HAD DENIED, WHICH IS 3 0 1 JOHNSON SPRINT.UH, THIS IS THE TOP OF THE APPLICATION AND YOU CAN SEE THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILLED OUT APPROPRIATELY AND IT'S ALSO BEEN APPROPRIATELY SIGNED AND DATED.
SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IS A PROPERTY HERE ON THE CORNER OF JOHNSON AND CRAVEN STREET, 3 0 1 JOHNSON STREET.
AND, UH, WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT, UH, SOME GATES AT THREE LOCATIONS ON THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY INDICATED BY THE YELLOW ARROWS HERE.
THE ONE AT THE TOP IS A WALKTHROUGH GATE.
UH, THE ONE ON THE RIGHT, UH, UH, NEXT TO THE WORD CRAVEN IS ALSO A WALKTHROUGH GATE.
AND THEN THE ONE TOWARDS THE BOTTOM IS A DOUBLE GATE FOR THE DRIVEWAY.
SO WE'LL START WITH THE LAST ONE FIRST.
UH, THE, UH, THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH BY THE APPLICANT OF THE CURRENT, UH, DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE.
AND SO THEY'RE PROPOSING TO PLACE A DOUBLE GATE ACROSS THIS, TO NOTE HERE FOR THE PUBLIC IS THAT, UH, THESE, UH, BRICK PIE LASKERS HERE ARE PILLARS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE, UH, ENTRANCE, UH, ARE ABOUT SEVEN FEET TALL.
AND HERE'S A CLOSEUP VIEW ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE TOWARDS THE TOP.
UM, CAN'T SEE WHAT THIS POINTS ARE VERY WELL, BUT TOWARDS THE TOP OF THE, UH, UH, THERE IS A PIECE OF METAL STILL PROJECTING OUT FROM, UH, PRIOR INSTALLATION OF A METAL GATE, UH, THAT MAY COME UP IN THE DISCUSSION.
THEN THE SECOND GATE IS THE OTHER ONE THAT WAS ON PRAVEN STREET.
THIS ONE IS I'M GONNA HAVE TO MAKE THIS A LITTLE SMALLER.
THIS ONE IS MUCH NARROWER, OF COURSE.
UM, AND, UH, HOWEVER, THE, UH, PILLARS HERE ARE ALSO ABOUT SEVEN FEET TALL AND THERE IS A SMALL STEP AT THE BOTTOM.
IT GETS CUT OFF BY THE, UH, BY THE BOTTOM OF THE PHOTO.
AND THEN THE THIRD ONE IS ON JOHNSON STREET SIDE, THE FRONT ENTRY.
AND HERE WE HAVE A BROADER, A WIDER ANGLE VIEW, A BROADER VIEW OF THIS, UH, AND, UH, THIS, UH, ENTRANCE ALSO HAS SEVEN FOOT HIGH BRICK PILLARS.
UH, AND YOU CAN SEE, UH, SOME OF THE, UH, UH, EXISTING FENCING, UH, THAT ALSO IS ALMOST SEVEN FEET TALL, UM, FROM THE GROUND ON THIS.
AND YOU ALSO NOTICED THE PATTERN OF THE, UH, OF THE FENCING AS WELL, WHERE IT'S, UH, UH, UM, I GUESS DOUBLE A DOUBLE NUMBER OF, UH, PICKETS AT THE BOTTOM AND A SINGLE NUMBER AT THE TOP, THE BEST WAY TO EXPLAIN THAT THIS BEING A CLOSEUP NOW THAT VERY SAME, UH, GATEWAY ENTRANCE, YOU CAN SEE A CLOSE UP OF THAT FENCE AS WELL.
NOW IT'S TECHNICALLY, UH, TO BE CLEAR, THERE IS A SMALL, UH, GARDEN WALL AND AT THE BOTTOM OF THE FENCE, UH, PORTION OF THE, OF THE BALL APPLICANTS ARE PROVIDED SOME EXAMPLES OF THE KIND OF GATEWAY THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WE'LL SEE SOME DRAWINGS IN A MINUTE.
THESE WERE SOME OF THE EXAMPLES THAT, UM, WHERE THEIR INSPIRATION.
SO TO SAY THIS ONE ON THE BOTTOM HAPPENS TO BE STRAIGHT ACROSS THE STREET ON JOHNSON STREET AT 3 0 4 JOHNSON STREET, AND THAT KIND
[00:10:01]
OF A DOUBLE SPACING AT THE BOTTOM AND SINGLE SPACING AT THE TOP WITH THE LITTLE SPEAR ON, ON THE TOP OF EACH ONE.AND THEN THIS IS A, AN EXAMPLE THAT THEY FOUND OF A DOUBLE, A DOUBLE GATE, A DOUBLE METAL GATE, UH, NEARBY JUST A FEW BLOCKS AWAY ON EDGERTON.
AND HERE'S A EXAMPLE OF, UH, AT LEAST THE SHORT VERSION OF A WALK-THROUGH GATE.
UM, ALSO WITH THE DOUBLE ON THE BOTTOM AND SINGLE ON THE TOP KIND OF DESIGN.
SO HERE ARE THE SKETCHES THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED VERY NICELY DRAWN BY THE WAY, UH, AND, UH, TO SCALE.
SO THIS SHOWS THE DRIVEWAY GATE DOUBLE-WIDE GATE, UH, AND SHOWS ALSO THOSE SURROUNDING BRICK, UH, COLUMNS OR PILLARS, AS WELL AS THE BRICK WALL FENCING THAT IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THAT.
UH, WE DID REQUEST THAT AT, FROM A DESIGN REVIEW MEETING AND ALSO THE BRICK PLANTER IS SHOWN AT THE BOTTOM, BUT PRIMARILY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BASICALLY THAT EIGHT ARCHED, UH, GATEWAY DESIGN AND THE, UH, THE TOP OF THE ACTUAL GATE ITSELF IS 72 OR 6 72 INCHES OR SIX FEET.
WHEREAS THE WALKTHROUGH GATES ARE SIMILAR DESIGN, UH, ALSO KIND OF AN ARCHED, UH, SHAPED TO THEM, BUT WITH THE DOUBLE PICKETS ON THE BOTTOM, SINGLE ON THE TOP AND THE, UH, SPEARHEADS ON EACH, AND THESE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT SHORTER, ONLY 62 INCHES, UH, AND, UM, APPROXIMATELY 40 INCHES WIDE.
THESE ARE SINGLE LEAD, SINGLE GATES, HOWEVER, NOT DOUBLE.
AND THIS ONE IS THE ONE ON JOHNSON STREET.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT WIDER, 52 INCHES.
AND HERE YOU CAN SEE WITH THE DIFFERENT CONDITION WITH, UH, THE LOWER BRICK WALL AND THEN THE WOODEN FENCE ON ABOVE THE FLOOR WOULDN'T W OR THE LOWER BRICK WALL.
THIS ONE ALSO IS 62 INCHES ABOVE THE STEP THAT'S UNDERNEATH THE GATE.
SO IN ADDITION TO THAT, UH, OUR ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REVIEW, UH, SHOWS, UH, THAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR DIDN'T CHECK IT OFF, BUT IT DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE ORDINANCE.
AND THE CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR WILL NOT REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT.
UH, AND THEN WE'RE READY WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS WHENEVER YOU ARE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH THIS PROJECT SAYING, UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE APPLICATION COMPLETE SEEING NONE? DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD AT THIS TIME? SO, UM, WE WERE ABLE TO GO AND TALK TO THE INSTALLER FOR THE GATES.
ONE OF THE QUESTIONS ASKED AT THE DESIGN REVIEW WAS HOW THEY WERE GOING TO BE ATTACHED TO THE PILLARS.
AND I DIDN'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION WHEN I DID ALL THE OTHER STUFF.
SO, UM, ON THE DRIVEWAY GATE, YOU HAD ASKED IF IT WAS POSSIBLE TO USE THOSE BRACKETS THAT WERE ALREADY THERE AT THE SIX FOOT MARK, WHAT HE INTENDS TO DO, WHICH I WASN'T BEING THE DRUNK, UH, DRAMA ON THERE IS HE HAS A CONCERN ABOUT ATTACHING THE DRIVEWAY GATES DIRECTLY TO THE PILLARS WITH JUST, UM, BRACKETS LIKE THE FENCES ATTACHED BECAUSE OF THE WEIGHT OF THE ROD IRON.
HIS INTENT IS ACTUALLY TO HAVE IT'S TWO TO THREE INCH, UM, METAL POLES.
THAT'LL GO UP INSIDE ON EACH SIDE AND HE'S GOING TO HAVE IT IN THE GROUND ON THE BOTTOM, AND THEN ATTACHED TO THOSE BRACKETS AT THE TOP THAT ARE ALREADY THERE.
THAT'LL BE HOW IT'S ATTACHED TO THE TOP.
SO HE DOESN'T HAVE TO PUT ANY ADDITIONAL BRACKETS IN, AND THEN THAT POST, BECAUSE IT'S IN THE GROUND AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO WITHSTAND THE WEIGHT OF THE GATES THEMSELVES.
UM, SO HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.
THE OTHER TWO GATES WILL BE LIGHT ENOUGH BECAUSE THEY'RE SMALLER AND THEY WILL BE ATTACHED DIRECTLY TO THE PILLARS.
AND THE BRACKET GOES INTO THE MORTAR, JUST LIKE THE WOOD OF THE FENCE.
IT'S BUYING THE TWO, UM, ENTRYWAY GATES ACTUALLY HAD THAT WOOD ON BOTH OF THOSE.
THOSE ARE ALSO HAVE BRACKETS THAT
[00:15:01]
THEY SIT ON TOP OF, VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE SEE ON THE DRIVEWAY.SO HE'LL BE DOING A BRACKET INTO THE MORNING.
ANYTHING ELSE? UM, THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
ARE THERE ANY, YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT IF YOU, ARE THERE ANY NOTIFIED PROPONENTS SEEING, UH, ARE THERE ANY NOTIFY OPPONENTS SEEING NONE? SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY REBUTTALS FOR THOSE.
SO IS THERE ANYONE WITH RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND HAS STANDING THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE CITY, STATE OR GOVERNMENT BODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK SEEING NONE, SIR.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE US YOUR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS? OKAY.
SO, UH, ALL RECOMMENDATIONS ARE FOR, UH, MARIANNE AND CHARLES CLEVELAND OF 3 0 1 JOHNSON STREET FOR THE PROJECT THAT THEIR HOME, UH, THE HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME IS THE JERKIN STUFFY HOUSE.
IT IS A CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE AND THE NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY DESCRIPTION FROM 2003, IT SAYS IT'S BUILT ABOUT 1830, UH, IS TWO AND A HALF STORIES, THREE BAYS WIDE, DOUBLE STORY, REAR PORCH EXPOSED BASE, CHIMNEYS GABLE, AND ROOF GABLED DORM, AND ONE STORY WINGS ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES FOR THE SANDBAG DESCRIPTION.
THE, UH, EXCERPTS THAT ARE EVEN PARTIALLY RELEVANT ARE MERELY, UH, RELATED TO THE OWNERS OR THE RESIDENTS, PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY LIVED THERE.
SO I JUST THOUGHT YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THIS PART.
THOMAS JERKINS WAS A PROMINENT MERCHANT AND SHOP OWNER AND HAD THIS LARGE TRANSITIONAL FEDERAL TO GREEK REVIVAL SIDE HALL FRAME HOUSE CONSTRUCTED IN THE 1830S, EARLY 1830S, PROBABLY FOR HIS DAUGHTER AFTER OTHER OWNERS, MINOT AND DUFFY.
ONE OF THE LEADERS OF THE LOCAL MOVEMENT TO RECONSTRUCT PRIONS PALACE LIVED HERE WITH HER HUSBAND, DR.
RICHARD DUFFY FROM 1909 UNTIL HER DEATH IN THE 1950S.
THIS PROJECT IS TO INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF SIX FOOT HIGH METAL GATES FOR THE DRIVEWAY AND TWO PEDESTRIAN ENTRIES IN THE PRIMARY.
ABC STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION.
ACTUALLY, I JUST REALIZED SHE'D MAKE THIS WIDER, A LITTLE BETTER OR FENCES AND GARDEN WALLS.
2.5 0.1 2.5 0.2 FOR DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 AND 3.1 0.5 FOR MODIFICATION, 3.2 0.1 3.2 0.3 3.2 0.4 AND 3.2 0.5 FOR MASONRY 5.1 0.1 METALS 5.3 0.1 5.3 0.3 AND 5.3 0.4 AND 5.4 0.2.
THE STATEMENTS OF REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION INSTEAD OF JUDGMENT ARE THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE NARROW STITCH DEVELOPMENT PATTERN TO THE PROPOSAL IS A MODIFICATION PROJECT, THREE OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES FOR THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY AND FIVE.
THE PROJECT IS NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF SIX FOOT HIGH METAL GATES FOR THE DRIVEWAY AND TWO PEDESTRIAN ENTRIES IN THE PRIMARY ABC MA'AM.
DO YOU HAVE ANY FINAL COMMENTS THERE? BOBBY? SO DIRECTOR.
SO WE WILL NOW HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THESE GATES PRIOR TO THE DISCUSSION.
I WANT TO MAKE A CAVEAT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND GATES AND FENCES, BECAUSE OUR GUIDELINES ARE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THESE THAT YOU CAN HAVE IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS FOUR FOOT AND IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS SIX FOOT.
HOWEVER, WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK THE AFRICA TO TAKE DOWN ALL THE FENCES THAT SHE'S GOT AND REBUILD THEM.
SO THERE COULD BE A FOUR-FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT AND SIX FOOT FITS.
YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BACK.
[00:20:01]
GATES THAT SHE IS ASKING TO PUT UP ARE GOING TO BE HIGHER THAN, THAN WHAT OUR GENERAL GUIDELINES ASK FOR ONLY BECAUSE ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY FENCING AROUND HIS HOUSE AND IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE AND LOOKED VERY ODD TO PUT A FOUR-FOOT FENCE IN HER DRIVEWAY, WHICH HAS HUGE COLUMNS THERE.SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS HAS MADE VERY CLEAR AS WE DISCUSSED THESE GATES SO THAT IT IS, THIS IS A GREAT EXCEPTION TO OUR WOMB, BUT ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S FIXING ALREADY THERE.
AND SHE'S TRYING TO PUT GATES THAT GO ALONG WITH THE FENCES THAT ARE ALREADY THERE.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, ANY QUESTIONS THAT MEMBERS WANT TO ASK? I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, WHEN DID YOU ASK WITH YOUR ENTRY GATES, DO YOU PLAN TO HAVE, ARE THEY AUTOMATED? UM, MAY I COME ON UP TO WHERE THE MIGRANTS, UH, WE HAVE DISCUSSED POSSIBLY, BUT WE HAVE NOT MADE THAT DECISION YET.
IF YOU DO AUTOMATE THEM, YOU HAVE TO REALLY PUT THAT BOX.
SO YOU CAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEAS ON IF YOU DO AUTOMATE HOW? UH, NO.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT MAYBE, BUT NOT PLANNING ON THE MAINLY BEING OPEN.
SO IT'S JUST MORE LIKE WE GO OUT OF TOWN FOR A WHILE OR WHATEVER, FOR SECURITY REASONS MAINLY, OR IF WE'RE RUNNING AROUND, OUT THERE WITH A GUN.
THE POST THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PUT ON THE ENTRY A DRIVEWAY, ARE THEY METAL? YES.
EVERYTHING, SAME METAL IS WHAT THE GATES ARE MADE OF.
AND THEY'LL BE JUST A, YOU SAID TWO TO THREE INCHES IN WIDTH, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE WEIGHT OF THE GATES END UP LITTLE WORK FOR THE WINTER.
AND WILL THEY BE FASTENED TO THE BRICK COLUMN AT THE TOP WHERE THAT BRACKET ACTUALLY COMES OUT.
SO YOU HAVE A TOP HAT BATHROOM AT THE BOTTOM.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ANYONE WANTS TO ASK AT THIS TIME? WELL, I DO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING TRIP MY VIDEO, UH, FOR PROVIDING THE DRAWING, SHOWING THE HEIGHT OF THE WHITE FENCE, RELATIVE TO THE PEERS AND THE SPACING.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS VERY HELPFUL IN TERMS OF VIEWING YOUR APPLICATION.
YES, WE DO APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE, UH, IN DESIGN REVIEW, WE HAD QUITE A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS ISSUE, AS I SAID IN THE BEGINNING, CAUSE WE HAVE VERY SPECIFIC GUIDELINES ABOUT FENCES AND GATES.
UM, AND SO, UH, IN THIS INSTANCE WE'D HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.
THERE'S ALREADY A HUGE VENT POST THERE.
THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN UP TO US.
WE WOULD NOT HAVE PUT THERE, BUT IT'S THERE.
SO IS THERE NO OTHER DISCUSSION AT THIS TIME, IF WANTS TO DO MADAM CHANGES FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD? UM, IT MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO CAUSE THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE WATCHING THIS MEETING, UM, DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE DISCUSSION THAT OCCURRED AT DESIGN REVIEW.
AND WHAT WAS DISCUSSED AT DESIGN REVIEW IS NOT INCORPORATED IN THE RECORD AND IT'S NOT EVIDENCE AND TONIGHT'S HEARING.
SO IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA FOR YOU OR THIS COMMISSION TO ADD ADDITIONAL FACTS INTO THE RECORD, TO SUBSTANTIATE AND SUPPORT ANY DECISION THAT YOU MIGHT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED.
WELL, THE THING THAT WE DISCUSSED THAT DESIGN REVIEW IS WHAT I TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF OUR, OUR REGULATIONS THAT WE HAVE FOR FENCING, AS I'VE SAID SEVERAL TIMES, PLUS, UH, AS MY STEAM COLLEAGUE TALKED ABOUT, UH, THE PICTURES THAT ARE IN HERE, WE ASKED HER TO SHOW WHERE THE GATE WAS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE FENCING.
THAT'S THERE, THE WOODEN FENCING THAT'S THERE.
UM, COULD YOU, COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE, UM, BIG FENCE GOING BACK INTO THE YARD? YEAH.
THIS, THIS RIGHT HERE, UH, TO SHOW THE SHOW HOW TALL IT WAS AND THEN ON THOSE OTHER, UH, FENCES TO GIVE THE HEIGHT IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE OTHER PARTS LIKE THIS ONE RIGHT HERE TO THE OTHER PARTS OF THE FANS AND UP AND THE COLUMNS AND HOW, HOW TALL THE COLUMNS WERE.
SO WE ASKED FOR SPECIFIC DETAILS ABOUT THIS, UH, H VERY, JOE WILL BE VERY CLEAR WHY THESE GATES ARE AS TALL AS THEY ARE.
SO THIS IS WHAT THE BULK OF THE DISCUSSION
[00:25:01]
WAS ABOUT.WHEN ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE TO WHAT UPSET? WELL, I THINK MADAM CHAIR WAS TRYING TO SAY THAT, UH, UH, THE SCALE OF THE GATES CREATE A CONTINUITY ALONG THE TOP OF THE FENCING THAT MAKES IT APPROPRIATE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.
AND SO OBVIOUSLY WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT, UM, SOME OF THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE WOULD USUALLY DISCUSS, BUT, UM, IN WORKING WITH YOUR EXISTING CONFIGURATION, UH, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THE SCALE AND PROPORTION OF THESE GATES, UM, ARE APPROPRIATE.
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I MEANT TO SAY.
THAT IS WHAT I MEANT TO SAY IS THAT ENOUGH DETAIL.
I THINK THAT THAT IS CERTAINLY APPROPRIATE DETAIL FROM WHICH, UM, IT CONCLUSION CAN BE MADE.
I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE CONSIDERING HOW ELOQUENT VICE CHAIR, HOW ELOQUENTLY HE POSED THAT POSITION.
I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD CERTAINLY BE INCORPORATED IN OUR STATEMENTS OF REASON.
MAYBE, PERHAPS YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN WHEN WE GET THERE.
I SEE IF I CAN REMEMBER AS OTHER, THE BRACKETS THAT ARE ON THOSE, ARE THEY THIS DIGITAL FROM AN ORIGINAL GATE? YES.
SO IN A SENSE, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO AGREE TO THIS BECAUSE WE'RE REALLY RESTORING THE GAME AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY.
IT SOUNDS LIKE, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? WHICH STORIC LIKE, WELL, AND THIS WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ASKED IN DESIGN REVIEW WAS TO USE THESE BRACKETS THAT ARE THERE THAT ARE HARD STORIES TO USE THESE BRACKETS ON SOME WAY.
I THINK IT'S ANOTHER REASON TO, TO AGREE WITH IT BECAUSE WE'VE, APPARENTLY WE'RE RESTORING IT TO WHAT IT WAS HISTORICALLY.
ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COULD I HAVE THE MOTION? YEAH, I'LL BE HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION.
IF A STAFF WOULD HELP ME WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE SCREEN.
WE FIND THE APPLICATION FOR 3 0 1 JOHNSON STREET TO BE NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH NEW BERN'S CODE OF ORDINANCE, SECTION 15 FOR 11 TO 15, 4 29, AND NEW BURNS HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES, UH, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES, FENCES AND GARDEN WALLS, 2.5 0.1 2.5 0.2 DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 3.1 0.5 MODIFICATIONS 3.2 0.1 3.2 0.3 3.2 0.4 3.2 0.5 MASONRY 5.1 0.1 METAL'S 5.3 0.1 5.3 0.3 5.3 0.4, PAINT 5.4 0.2.
AND I'M GOING TO ALSO ADD A 2.8 0.2.
I REALIZED THAT SOME SIGNAGE, BUT, UM, WE, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL YOUR FASTENERS GO INTO THE MORTAR JOINTS AS OPPOSED TO THE FACES OF THE BRICK THEMSELVES.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M ADDING THAT PARTICULAR, UM, GUIDELINE.
AND SO, UH, UH, FINDING OF FACT BEING THAT THE, UH, UH, THE PROJECT IS A MODIFICATION PROJECT, UM, AND, AND IT CONSISTS OF AN EXISTING FIPSE WITH DIMENSIONS THAT DIFFER FROM THOSE THAT WE, UH, CUSTOMARILY WORK WITH IN THE DISTRICT, UM, THAT THE PROPOSED GATES, UM, PROVIDE CONTINUITY AND ALIGNMENT WITH THE TOP OF THAT FENCE, UH, THAT THE, UH, METHODS AND MATERIALS ARE USED IN TRADITIONAL WAYS.
UM, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE, UH, REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND THEN FINALLY THAT THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRUENCE WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SECOND, WE HAVE A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY, AYE, THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CEO OF THE ISSUE IS WE HAVE A SECOND TO OVER HERE.
[00:30:04]
WE DIDN'T CATCH THE SECOND.SO OUR SECOND, SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY, AYE, THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE TO PASS.
SO MA'AM, YOU CAN GO BUILD ALL YOUR GATE, JUST BE IN CONTACT WITH THAT.
WE'RE APPROVING YOUR, YOUR PROPERTY.
[3.D. 720 Pollock St. – to include a front porch reconstruction, new rear fencing, a new shed, a new pergola, and new patio paving in all AVCs.]
UH, ITEM D SEVEN 20 POLLOCK STREET IS A CONTINUATION AND IT IS ASKED TO BE CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT DUE TO NO INFORMATION ABOUT THE FRONT PORCH IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION THAT WAS MADE.SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF THE SEVENTH STREET APPLICATION? OKAY.
CAN WE HAVE A SEC MADAM CHAIR? UH, I THINK MS. STONE'S MOTION WAS TO CONTINUE THE APPLICATION FOR SEVEN 20 POLLOCK STREET TO A DATE AND TIME SPECIFIC IN A SPECIFIC LOCATION.
SO YOU GOT TO BRING IT TO THE NEXT MEETING MARCH 17TH, MARCH, MARCH 16, 16.
SO OUR PROMOTION IS TO CONTINUE THE APPLICATION FOR SEVEN 20 PILOT STREET TO MARCH 16TH AT FIVE 16TH, MARCH 16, MARCH 16TH, AT 5:30 PM IN THE CITY HALL COURT AND CITY HALL AND PARKING LIMITS.
AND A SECOND, WHO WAS THE SECOND I'LL SECOND.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
THE CONTINUANCE IS APPROVED AND WE'VE ALREADY SAID THAT ITEM E EIGHT, 16 EACH MONTH IS GOING TO BE A WITHDRAWN.
THERE IS NO OLD BUSINESS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
UH, WE HAVE ONE PERSON IN THE PUBLIC OUT THERE.
WE HAVE NO NEW BUSINESS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
[8.A. Report on CoAs Issued 01/11/2022 – 02]
THE ADMINISTRATORS WOULD REPORT ITEM A V HAS LISTED HERE, UH, THE MAJORS AND THE MINORS.UM, THE, UH, HAVE GONE ON, UH, ITEM B.
[8.B. Report on CoA Extensions Issued since the Prior Regular Meeting: None]
UH, THERE ARE, UH, NO, UH, COA EXTENSION ISSUES SINCE THE LAST REGULAR MEETING.[8.C. Other Items and Updates]
ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS OR UPDATES THAT ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO BRING FORTH AT THIS POINT IN TIME? THE ONLY THING I WANT TO BRING FORTH IS ON THE FOURTH.ONE OF THE MANNERS, UH, MATT, WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT REPLACEMENT OF THREE TREES, DID THEY GIVE THE VARIETY OF THE TREES THAT WILL BE USED AS REPLACEMENT? YES.
THEY, THEY, UH, INDICATE, UM, THE SPECIES THAT ARE REMOVED AND THEN THE SPECIES THAT'S TO BE THAT, UM, ARE TO BE USED TO REPLACE THEM SO THAT THEY WILL HOPEFULLY REACH AT ONE POINT THOUGH, BECAUSE THAT'S THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE REPLACEMENT TREES HAVE TO HAVE A CANOPY.
THAT'S AT LEAST SIMILAR TO THE, A MATURE CANOPY THAT IS AT LEAST SIMILAR TO THE ONE THAT IS BEING REPLACED OR REMOVED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS OR UPDATES THAT ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO BRING FORWARD AT THIS POINT IN TIME HEARING NONE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CONCLUDE? YOU SAID YOU WOULD HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR, OPPOSED HEARING NONE.