[00:00:01]
BEING THE IMPORTANT I CALL[1. Opening of Meeting with Roll Call]
TO ORDER.SO SIR, CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL AND SEE IF WE HAVE A CALL? UH, ELLEN SHERIDAN, DR.
RUTH COX, ROSA, JIM BISBEE HERE, TONY BRYANT HERE.
AND THAT STONE TRIP YOU'RE HERE.
PEGGY BROADWAY, CANDICE SULLIVAN.
SO BEFORE WE BEGIN THE MEETING ON MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, UM, I'D LIKE TO BRING UP AN ISSUE WE'D LIKE TO ADD ONE ITEM TO THE AGENDA DOWN HERE ON YOUR APPLICATIONS OF 2 26 NEW STREET REGARDING THE SHIT IN THE BACK THAT THEY HAD TALKED WITH US ABOUT.
DOES ANYONE OBJECT TO US ADDING THAT TO THE AGENDA, TO NON MADAM CHAIR, JUST IN THE SPIRIT OF BEING HELPFUL IN LAYING SOME ADDITIONAL FACTS ON THE RECORD, THE APPLICATION FOR 2 23 NEW STREET APPEARED BEFORE YOU ALL, UM, AND WAS NOTICED FOR THE MAY 20, 22 MEETING, UM, AT THAT TIME, THE APPLICANT AND HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE WERE UNAVAILABLE.
YOU ALL MOVED TO CONTINUE THE APPLICATION FOR 2 23 NEW STREET TO THIS MEETING, I'M SORRY, 2 26 NEW STREET.
UM, AT WHICH TIME IT WAS INADVERTENTLY THAT APPLICATION WAS INADVERTENTLY LEFT OFF YOUR PRINTED AGENDA.
HOWEVER, UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM REVIEWING THE PACKET FROM THE MAY MEETING THAT ALL OF THE NOTICES AND EVERYTHING WERE PROPER FOR MAY, THE MOTION TO CONTINUE TODAY WAS VALID.
SO YOU ALL DO HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR THAT APPLICATION FOR 2 22 NEW STREET, IF YOU ARE SO INCLINED.
I DO BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
AND THE PIG STAFF MAY BE READY TO PRESENT THAT INFORMATION, UM, DURING THE, OKAY.
AND DO WE HAVE TO DO A VOTE CALL TO ADD THAT TO THE AGENDA? IT CERTAINLY WOULDN'T HURT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY BECAUSE THERE'S A CONTINUUM FROM THE LAST MEETING.
SO YOU CAN, WELL, AND SHE'LL BE ABLE JUST TO BE ON THE SAFE SIDE TO ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR.
SAY I WAS THERE A MOTION THAT WE ADD IT TO THE AGENDA.
WE GOT A SECOND WITH PAYING ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED TO YOUR NERVES? SO YOUR MOTION PASSES.
SO WE WILL ADD THAT TO THE END OF THE AGENDA AFTER.
SO AFTER 6 22 EAST FRONT STREET.
SO NOW WE WE'VE HAD THE ROLL CALL.
[2. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting(s)]
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO SPANS WITH THE READING OF THE MINUTES? SO MOVE AND I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND OVER THERE WITH TIME, UH, CALL FOR A VOTE.CAN I HAVE THE MOTION? MOTION AND TONY? OKAY.
[3.A. Hearings: Introduction, Swearing-In, Summary of Process]
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IS A PUBLIC COMMISSION APPOINTED BY THE CITY OF NEWBORNS BOARD OF ALL THE ONE.IT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESERVING AND SAFEGUARDING NEWBORNS LOCALLY, DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT DOWNTOWN AND RIVERSIDE BASED ON US DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR STANDARDS, STATE STATUTES, CITY ORDINANCES, AND NEW BRUNS, HISTORIC GUIDELINES, TWO OF THE MAJOR TASKS OR THE HPC INCLUDE APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND PREVENTING DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES.
THE HBC HOLDS A CROISSANT JUDICIAL HEARING ON AN APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THE COMMISSION HEARS SWORN TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT BY PARTIES WHO RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE HEARING AND BY OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAD RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE APPLICATION.
THE COMMISSION CANNOT CONSIDER COMMENT BASED ON PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES, HEARSAY, OR PERSONAL OPINION THAT CAN NOT BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
LIKEWISE, COMMISSIONER SHALL REFRAIN FROM STATING PERSONAL OPINIONS, PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES ARE HEARSAY DURING A HEARING.
HEY, COMMISSION'S DECISION ON AN APPLICATION IS BASED SOLELY ON TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT A HEARING THAT DOOR DIRECTLY RELATES TO THIS STORK GUIDELINES.
SO ANYONE WHO INTENDS TO GIVE EVIDENCE OR TO SPEAK AT THE HEARING TONIGHT NEEDS TO COME FORTH, DO THE PODIUMS SIGN, THE LIFTS THAT I BELIEVE I'LL SEE
[00:05:01]
UP THERE AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE TO BE SWORN IN.SO ANYONE WHO'S ON HIS FEE OKAY.
SO EVERYBODY HAS SIGNED IN NOW.
SO THIS IS HOW THE HEARING PROCESS WOULD GO.
THE HBC ADMINISTRATOR PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT, OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE PRESENTS THE APPLICATION.
IF THEY SO DESIRE, PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WILL RECEIVE.
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 HAVE RELEVANT INFORMATION AND WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED, CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE FINAL COMMENTS ON THEIR APPLICATION.
COMMISSIONERS, DISCUSS THE EVIDENCE.
AND THEY ASK FOR CLARIFICATION FROM THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE, THE CHAIRMAN CALLS FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE OR DENY APPLICATION, WHICH STATED FINDING A FAT, THE MOTION IS DISCUSSED BY THE COMMISSION, THE CHAIRMAN CALLS FOR A VOTE ON THE MOTION BY THE COMMISSION, A COA CAN BE APPROVED.
IT CAN PLAY APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
IT CAN BE CONTINUED OR IT CAN BE DENIED.
[3.B. 516 Craven St. – to include internal fencing in the Secondary AVC.]
SO WE WILL GO TO THE FIRST APPLICATION, WHICH IS 5 1 6 CRADLE STREET.AND TO NOTE THAT MS. SULLIVAN HAS ARRIVED FIVE 40.
UH, THIS IS THE APPLICATION FOR FIVE 16 CRAVEN STREET FOR MR.
UH, AND THEIR PROJECT IS FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING FENCE SECTION END GATE, UH, SECTIONS AND GATE.
UH, THEY PROVIDED THE, UH, GUIDELINES SECTIONS AND A DESCRIPTION OF THE MATERIALS, AND THEY'VE FILLED UP THE REST OF THE APPLICATION AND SIGNED AND DATED IT.
UM, THEY ALSO PROVIDED SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, UH, RELATED TO THE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED AS WELL.
AND SOME PHOTOGRAPHS I'M GOING TO MAKE THIS A LITTLE SMALLER.
SO MOST OF THE PAGE ANYWAY, ALL RIGHT.
UH, THAT'S THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THE GATE IS AT THE BACK OF THE DRIVEWAY ON THE LEFT.
SO IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WHITE FENCING OR THE WHITE RAILING.
IT'S THE BROWN FENCING HALFWAY BACK ON THE, ON THE LEFT.
HERE'S A CLOSER UP VIEW OF THAT IS THE FENCING BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS FENCE ON THE LEFT, UH, AND THE CORNER, THE CORNER OF THE ONE-STORY, UH, UH, PIECE OF THE BUILDING THERE ON THE RIGHT AND INCLUDES BOTH SECTIONS OF FENCING AND THE GATE, THOSE WILL BE REMOVED, OR WE HAVE A SITE PLAN DOING LARGE, THIS
[00:10:15]
AND SO, UM, THIS CRAVEN STREET IS UP TOP OF THE PAGE, FRONT OF THE HOUSE AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE.AND SO THE DRIVEWAY THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IS, UH, THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE HOUSE, UH, THIS SHOWS THE EXISTING FENCE, UH, THE FRONT, UH, AND IT HAS AN ANGLED PIECE ON THE LEFT SIDE.
AND THEN, UH, ABOUT THREE FEET BACK FROM THAT IS WHERE THE NEW PROPOSED FENCE WILL GO, UH, WITH ITS GATE.
UM, UH, THERE WOULD BE A SLIGHT ADJUSTMENT TO THIS PLAN, TO ANGLE THE ANGLE, THE FENCE, TO ALLOW FOR THE GATE TO BEGIN AN ANGLE PIECE AS WE'LL SEE IN A SECOND.
SO THESE ARE PHOTOS OF THE EXISTING I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GO.
SO, UM, UPPER LEFT SHOWS A CONDITION AND ALL OF THESE SHOW, THE CURRENT CONDITION OF THE FENCE.
SO THEY ARE LOOKING TO REPLACE THAT FENCE.
WE NEED TO GET TO ANY OF THIS INFORMATION LATER, WE CAN DO THIS.
UM, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE FENCING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT.
YOU CAN SEE WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT WITH THE ANGLE.
UH, THE SIDE FENCES WILL, UM, BEFORE REACHING THE FENCE, WE'LL ADD THESE SMALL ANGLE PIECES AND THEN THE ACTUAL METAL GATE, UH, WILL BE IN BETWEEN THOSE.
UH, AND THIS IS ALSO AN EXAMPLE OF THE STYLE OF THE FENCING AS WELL.
THE HEIGHT WOULD NOT EXCEED SIX FEET IN FACT, CLOSER TO FIVE FEET FOUR.
UM, SO, UH, 62 INCHES FOR THE TOP OF THE POST, UH, AND, UH, PICKETS ABOUT 58 INCHES AND THEN THE REST OF THE INFORMATION AS THE DISTANCES TO THE ENDS OF THOSE FENCES.
UM, AND THEN AT THE BOTTOM, YOU CAN SEE THE GATE IS 36 INCHES WIDE.
AND THE GAPS BETWEEN, UH, PICKETS IS, UH, THREE INCHES OR LESS THREE INCHES IS THE PROPOSAL.
SO THE, UH, ZONING IN AND INSPECTIONS, UH, FORM HERE SHOWS THAT THE, UH, UH, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PRO PROJECT DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE ORDINANCE.
AND THE CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTORS INDICATED THAT IT WILL NOT REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND THEN WE'RE READY WHEN THE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHENEVER YOU ARE, DO WE HAVE A MOTHER COMMISSIONERS, ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH THIS PROJECT SEEING NONE? OR DO YOU SEE ANYONE HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE APPLICATIONS COMPLETENESS SEEING NONE? SO DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO PRESENT ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS APPLICATION AT THIS TIME? I DO NOT FEEL IT'S COMPLETE.
ARE THERE, YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT.
ARE THERE ANY NOTIFIED OPPONENTS IN THE HOUSE WITH US TONIGHT SEEING THAT? ARE THERE ANY NOTIFIED PROPONENTS IN THE HOUSE SEEING NONE? SO THERE'S NO REBUTTAL FOR MANY OF THOSE PEOPLE.
IS THERE ANYONE WITH RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND HALF STANDING WHO WANTS TO SPEAK SEEING NONE? IS THERE ANYONE WHO CAN PROVIDE, UH, ANY INFORMATION FOR THE STATE, THE CITY OF OUR HARD GOVERNMENTAL BODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, SEEING NONE? SO ADMINISTRATOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAIL AS THE STAFF FINDINGS ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS? CERTAINLY.
SO THESE ARE THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION FOR MARGO AS HOWARD FOOD SITES, UH, 4, 5 16 CRAVEN STREET, THE HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME IS THE RICHARDSON, THE HOUSE THAT IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AND THE, UH, NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY INDICATES THAT THE HOUSE IS BUILT AROUND 1920.
UH, IT IS TWO STORIES, THREE BAYS WIDE AS A HIP ROOF WITH LARGE IMPEDIMENT THAT FRONT DORMER AND FOR THE SIN FROM SANDBOX, THERE WAS NOTHING RELEVANT TO THE FENCING.
SO FOR FIVE 16 CRAVEN STREET, UH, THE PROJECT IS TO INCLUDE INTERNAL FENCING IN THE SECONDARIES ABC.
SO STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION FOR FENCES AND GARDEN WALLS.
2.5 0.12 AND THREE FOR METAL, 5.3 0.3 AND FOUR FOR PAINT, 5.4
[00:15:01]
0.3 AND FOUR.AND THE STATEMENTS OF REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE, THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE TYPE WE'VE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE PROPOSAL IS AN INTERNAL FENCING PROJECT, THREE, 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 APPLICATION IS NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE INTERNAL FENCING IN THE SECONDARY UBC.
SO MA'AM, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE AT THIS TIME? NO, YOU'RE NOT.
SO COMMISSIONERS, WHAT, UM, QUESTIONS MIGHT YOU HAVE? WHAT DISCUSSION DO YOU WANT TO HAVE ABOUT THIS FENCING? THE EXAMPLE FENCE IT USED WAS YELLOW, THE SURROUNDING FENCES AWAY.
MY QUESTION IS THE FENCE AND GATE THAT WE SEE AND THE PICTURES THAT YOU PROVIDED US IS THAT THE ACTUAL DATE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO USE, UM, NOT PURCHASED ANYTHING
WELL, WE, WE WOULD ACTUALLY NEED TO SEE THE GATE TO APPROVE IT.
SO WE WOULD, SO I GUESS ONE OF THE, IF WE WANT TO PROCEED ON WITH THIS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO SAY IS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO SAY THE ACTUAL GATE THAT YOU ARE ASKING TO BE USED HERE, AND WE COULD LET THAT BE, UH, APPROVED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR, BUT WE'VE GOT TO SEE THE ACTUAL GATE DESIGN.
MY CONCEPT IS THAT
AND SHE SAY, YOU JUST GIVE THAT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR.
PRESUMABLY WE WOULD WE'LL ACT ON THE, ON THE PROPOSAL AS A WHOLE, BUT THE CONDITION WOULD BE, YOU'D SEE THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE GATE, OR SOMETIMES TEND BE DESIGNED.
NOT THAT I HAVE TO GO PURCHASE A GAY.
SO MANY PEOPLE WILL GET SOMEONE TO DESIGN IT.
SOME PEOPLE WILL, UM, UH, FIND ONE AT THE STORE AND TAKE A PICTURE.
UM, SOME OTHER PEOPLE WILL, UM, FIND THEM ONLINE AND TAKE A SCREENSHOT.
ANY OF THOSE WOULD WORK FOR YOU JUST NEED TO KNOW THE THREE INCH SPACING AND THE T THE HEIGHT OF THE GATE AS A DIMENSION.
THE DESIGN A SKETCH DESIGN, RIGHT? IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A FABRICATION DESIGN.
WELL, I, I THINK WHEN SHE ASKED, UM, YOU HAD SAID NO, BUT SO YOU WANT SOMETHING LIKE THIS? ALL RIGHT.
WELL, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
WE NEED A PICTURE OF KIND OF THE EXACT FENCE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO USE, SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO NIGHT WITH THE STIPULATION THAT WHEN DO YOU FIND THE ACTUAL GATE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO USE, YOU NEED TO BRING A PICTURE OF IT IN SOME FORMAT, A SKETCH, A PICTURE OFF THE LOT, AND LET HIM LOOK AT IT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S THE WHITE PIE AND IT FITS INTO YOUR POSTS.
AND I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THE CONDITION ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FENCE, BUT NOT THE INSTALLATION OF THE GATE UNTIL THE GATE HAS ALSO BEEN APPROVED.
SO THEY CAN CONTINUE GET STARTED ON THE RIGHT.
SO WHOEVER MAKES, PUTS THE PROJECT FORWARD, THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS FOR US TO DO THAT.
[00:20:02]
OKAY.IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS.
SO SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT A MOTION FORWARD ABOUT THIS FENCE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT HAS BEEN ASKED FOR.
I MOVE THAT WE FIND THE APPLICATION FOR, UM, FIVE 16 CRAVEN STREET FOR A CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS, UH, BE NOT IN CONGRESS WITH NEWBORNS, UH, CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTION 15 DASH 4 1 1 TO 15 DAYS, 4 29 AND NEW BRITAIN'S HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS OF FACT FENCES AND GARDEN WALLS FIVE, A 2.5 0.12 AND THREE METAL, 5.3 0.3, 5.3 0.4, PAINT 5.4 0.3 AND 5.4 0.4.
FINDINGS OF FACT, THE PROJECT'S LOCATED THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE PROPOSAL IS AN INTERNAL FENCING PROJECT THAT PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, AND CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
THE APPLICATION'S NOT IN CONGRESS WITH THE GUIDELINES, WITH THE, WITH THE CONDITION THAT YOU CAN GO AHEAD WITH THE, UH, INSTALLATION OF THE FENCE, BUT YOU'LL PROVIDE THE, OUR ADMINISTRATOR WITH A PICTURE OF THE PROPOSED, UH, GATE BEFORE INSTALLATION.
CAN I HAVE A SECOND SAY, OKAY.
WE HAVE A SECOND OF YOUR TIME.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ISSUE A CLA SO MOVE.
SO MOVED OVER HERE TO MY LEFT.
OVER HERE TO MY OTHER LEFT IS THE SECOND KIND OF CALL FOR A VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, JIM, CAN YOU SIT ACTUALLY VERBALIZE YOUR SECOND? OKAY.
YEAH, I SAID SO ARE WE OKAY TO GO FORWARD? YES.
SO WE HAVE A SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY, AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE, THE MOTION PASSES.
SO YOU CAN START WITH YOUR, YOUR, YOUR FIXING.
AND ONCE YOU DECIDE ON THE SPECIFIC GATE, THEN YOU CAN JUST CONTACT HIM AND HE WILL TALK WITH YOU ABOUT THAT.
[3.C. 318 Liberty St. – to include an addition in the Tertiary AVC.]
ALRIGHT.SO OUR NEXT ITEM FOR TONIGHT IS THREE 18 LIBERTY STREET.
SO HERE WE HAVE THE APPLICATION, UH, FOR, UH, PROJECT, UH, BY CATHERINE AND PETER ADOLF.
AND, UH, THEIR DESCRIPTIONS ARE ALL ATTACHED ON THE SEPARATE SHEET.
THEY'VE PROVIDED VARIOUS PIECES AND SIGNED AND DATED.
UH, SO, UM, HERE'S THE PROJECT INFORMATION.
IT'S A 19 BY 20 ROOM ADDITION TO BE ADDED TO THE BACK OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
AND THE ADDITION WILL HOUSE A BATHROOM WITH WASHER, PRYOR WASHER, AND DRYER, AND A BEDROOM.
AND SECONDLY, UH, THE SPECIFIC GUIDELINES THEY MENTIONED ARE MENTIONED HERE, AND THEN LASTLY, UH, MATERIALS TO BE USED.
UH, OUR CEMENT WOULD A NEW SHINGLE GROUP.
UH, AND THEN ALSO, UH, WE'LL SEE IN A MINUTE AND ALSO SOME METAL SIDING.
SO THESE ARE, UM, PAGES THAT STAT ADDED, UH, SPECIFICALLY FOR THE LAST DISCUSSION, BUT LEFT THEM IN, IN CASE WE NEED TO COME BACK TO THEM.
UH, GUIDELINES IS, THERE WERE SOME QUESTION SO ON THIS PROJECT, UM, AND I'LL MAKE THIS A LITTLE BIT SMALLER.
UM, THE COUNTY GIS SYSTEM SHOWS, UH, THE PROPERTY AS TWO SEPARATE PROPERTIES, BUT INDEED IT'S ONLY ONE PROPERTY.
AND WE HAVE ATTACHED ALSO HERE, UH, VARIOUS FEEDS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT, UH, ESSENTIALLY THE UPPER HALF, UH, UM, WELL, LET'S SAY THE LOWER HALF IS AN ACCESS EASEMENT.
AND SO THE LINE BETWEEN THE TWO SHOULD PROBABLY JUST BE A DASHED LINE, UH, AND THE ACCESS EASEMENT IS, UH, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PROPERTY IN THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER, THE WHITE BUILDING, THE WHITE ROOF BUILDING THERE.
[00:25:01]
SO THE ADDITION WE'LL CROSS THAT, UM, THAT DASHED LINE, THAT'S WHY THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION.SO, UM, AND THESE ARE SOME OF THE DEEDS BREEZE THROUGH THOSE.
ALL RIGHT, NOW WE HAVE OUR PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
UH, THIS IS THE FRONT WITH THE SIDEWALK AT THE BOTTOM AND THE UPPER LEFT AND A BETTER ANGLE VIEW OF THAT FRONT.
UM, THEN THE SIDE, THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE.
UH, SO THE FRONT IS OFF PICTURE ON THE LEFT.
UH, AND THEN, UH, ON THE RIGHT LOWER RIGHT-HAND CORNER IS THE BACK OF THE EXISTING BUILDING SHOWING A WOODEN ADDITION ON THE BACK THERE, UM, AND SEAL.
SO THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE IS CONCRETE BLOCK WITH, UH, SOME SIDING, UH, IN CLOSING THE GABLE ENDS.
AND SO THIS IS NOW A REAR VIEW ON THE UPPER LEFT, AND THEN A CLOSER UP SHOT OF THE, UH, WOOD ADDITION FROM THE, UM, I GUESS THE LEFT SIDE, OR WE SHOULD PROBABLY SAY THE NORTH EASTERN CORNER.
UM, AND THEN THE ROUNDING, THE BUILDING, UH, THEN THIS IS THE BACK CORNER OF THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BUILDING, UH, LEFT AS WE LOOK AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
SO, UH, THE ADDITION OF GO BACK UP A SECOND IS TO BE BUILT, UH, IN THIS AREA ON BACK OF THIS BUILDING ON THE PRETTY MUCH, UH, MOST OF THE BACK OF THE BUILDING WITH, UH, UH, AN OFFSET.
AND WE'LL SEE THAT IN A MINUTE TOO, BUT THIS WOULDN'T A STRUCTURE WILL BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO DO THAT.
SO, UM, THESE ARE SOME OF THE SKETCHES.
AND SO HERE WE SEE A SKETCH OF THAT NEW ADDITION ON, UH, WITH THE TWO WINDOWS AND THE DOOR AND THE GABLE, UH, WITH THE, UH, REAR OF THE EXISTING BUILDING IN THE BACKGROUND.
SO TO SAY ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS SKETCH.
SO THE NEW ADDITION IS JUST THE SINGLE GABLE WITH THE TWO WINDOWS AND THE DOORS FROM THIS SIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE PITCH OF THE ROOF IS THE SAME FOUR AND 12 AS THE EXISTING ROOF, WHICH IS FOREIGN 12.
UM, AND SO, UM, UH, THAT'S, UH, MAY COME UP LATER AS WELL AS MEETING ONE OF THE GUIDELINES.
UH, AND THEN THIS IS A, A BETTER FLOOR PLAN OF THE, OF THE BETTER ONE, A FLOOR PLAN SHOWING AT THE TOP OF THE DRAWING WAS THE EXISTING BUILDING, SORRY, EXISTING STRUCTURE, WHICH IS 20 BY 30.
UH, AND THEN THE NEW ADDITION ON THE BACK, AND YOU'LL SEE IT HAS A FIVE FOOT, UH, SHIFT OVER FROM THE, UH, FROM THE EXISTING BUILDING.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE PROPERTY LINE ACTUALLY IS ON THE FACE ESSENTIALLY ON THE FACE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
AND THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK IN THE ZONING.
AND THEN THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE WITH REGARD TO THE SETBACK.
AND THEN THIS IS A SKETCH OF THE FLOOR PLAN, AND WE'LL SEE HERE, NOT ONLY ARE THERE TWO WINDOWS ON THE BACK, WHICH IS AT THE BOTTOM HERE, WHICH IS THERE WE GO, SO KEEP HAPPENING.
UH, THE TWO WINDOWS ON THE DOOR, ON THE BACK, UH, ON THIS, UH, THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DRAWING, WHICH IS THE RIGHT SIDE, GUILTY ON THE FRONT.
UH, WE ALSO HAVE OTHER WINDOWS THAT WE'LL SEE IN A SECOND.
AND THEN ON THE SIDE FACING THE SIDE, THAT'S CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
THERE ARE NO WINDOWS COMING DOWN.
THIS IS A SECTION OF THE BUILDING SHOWING ITS CONSTRUCTION.
IT IS A CONCRETE SLAB CONSTRUCTION WITH A TWO BY FOUR STUDS AND THEN, UH, ROOF TRUSSES, UH, AND THEN, UH, UM, INSTALLATION ROUTE.
UH, BUT THE, UH, AND THE ROOF DOES HAVE AN OVERHANG SIMILAR TO THE EXISTING ONE.
UH, AND THE SIDING IS SHOWN HERE ON THE, ON THE LEFT SIDE HERE IS INDICATED.
UM, WE'LL SEE, UH, SOME PHOTOS OF THAT, AND THEN ALSO THE ROOFING, UH, HAS SHOWN TO BE ALRIGHT, SO, UM, UH, TOUCH SOME MORE PHOTOS.
UH, METAL SIDING THAT IS ON SOME OF THE ADJACENT OR ADJACENT NEARBY BUILDINGS, UM,
[00:30:01]
UH, RIGHT THERE, UH, I GUESS ON THE ADJACENT LOT, YOU CAN SAY THE BIG WHITE BUILDING, THE BIG, THE BUILDING WITH A WHITE ROOF ALSO, UH, EXTENDS ALONG ITS RIGHT-HAND SIDE OR SOUTHERN SIDE.UH, THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION IS CONCRETE BLOCK, AND THEN IT DOES HAVE SOME, UH, METAL SIDING ON SOME ADDITIONS.
LET'S SEE THAT THEY'RE EVEN BETTER THERE.
AND THEN SOME MORE OF THAT METAL SIDING.
AND THEN THE SIDING GOES ALL THE WAY AROUND FOR THAT ENTIRE ADDITION.
UH, SO OTHER THAN THAT, UM, WE KIND OF OUR ZONING AND INSPECTIONS, UH, REPORT.
SO IT DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE ORDINANCE, AND IT WILL REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT AND THEN WE'RE READY WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH THIS BUILDING? DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES ON THE APPLICATIONS? COMPLETENESS COMMISSION? ALL RIGHT.
SO WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE TO THIS? NO.
ARE THERE ANY, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU, ONE DAY I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT RIGHT THERE YET.
WE'RE NOT THERE, BUT GABE, ARE THERE ANY NOTIFIED PROPONENTS IN THE AUDITS, ANY NOTIFIED OPPONENTS SEEING NONE? IS THERE ANYBODY WITH RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND HAS STANDING THAT WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT SEEING NONE? IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE CITY STATE OR ANY GOVERNMENT BODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION SEEING NONE? LET US HAVE YOUR STAFF PHONICS, CORRECT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR, UH, THE PROJECT THAT THREE 18 LIBERTY STREET FOR MS. KATHERINE ADOLPH AND MR. PETER ADOLPH, UH, THERE, THE HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME AND IS NOT APPLICABLE.
UH, THERE IS IT'S QUESTIONABLE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING.
IT IS NOT MENTIONED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY NOR IN SANDBAG.
UH, SO THE PROJECT IS FOR THREE 18 LIBERTY STREET TO AN INCLUDE AN ADDITION IN THE TERTIARY ABC.
SO STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION.
SO DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.14 AND FIVE FOR MODIFICATIONS, 3.2 0.1 AND TWO FOR ADDITIONS, 3.3 0.12 AND THREE FOR WALLS, TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.4 FOR WINDOWS DOORS AND OPENINGS.
4.3 0.2 FOR MS. MURRAY 5.1 0.5.
FOR WHAT 5.2 0.1 AND TWO FOR PAINT, 5.4 0.2, THREE AND FOUR FOR CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5.5 0.12 AND THREE AND SIX.
AND SO THE STATEMENTS ARE REASONED BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION AND STAFF JUDGMENT ARE ONE.
THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE TYPE WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN TO THE PROPOSAL AS A SMALL ONE-STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING CONCRETE BLOCK, ONE STORY STRUCTURE, THREE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES FOR THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT IN COMMENTS ACCORDINGLY AND FIVE.
THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRESS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE AN ADDITION IN THE TERTIARY, ABC.
SO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE ABOUT THIS ADDITION TO THIS BUILDING? THE EXISTING, UH, BUILDING IS SOME COME UP.
HE'S GOING TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.
SO NOW'S YOUR TIME TO COME UP? THE EXISTING BUILDINGS, CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING THE HOUSE.
NEXT DOOR IS A CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR THE METAL SIDES IS THAT METAL SIDES COVERING CINDERBLOCK OR IS IT JUST A METAL SIDE AND BUILDING THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS CONCRETE BLOCK.
UM, AND THE ADDITION IS PROPOSED WITH METAL SIDING.
UM, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE, I'M SURE YOU KNOW, THIS AREA WELL AND GO THERE TO UNDERSTAND ITS HISTORIC FABRIC, THE METAL SIDING ON THE CITY LAUNDRY, UM, WHICH THE PICTURES, UM, SHOWED, AND I SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT BETTER DIMENSIONS, BUT I'M GUESSING EIGHT BY 25.
I DON'T KNOW, UM, IS METAL SIDING TO THAT ADDITION, WHICH HOUSES THE UTILITIES OF A BLOCK BUILDING, WHICH IS THE CITY LAUNDRY BUILDING, WHICH IS THE CLOSEST
[00:35:01]
BUILDING TO THE EAST OF, UH, THE PROPOSED, UM, ADDITION, THE ROOM ADDITION, UM, THAT METAL SIDING I HAVE REQUESTED, UM, DURING THE TIME ACTUALLY WHEN MS. STONE WAS IN OUR CITY, UM, AND JOHN WOULD, WOULD NOT LET US TAKE DOWN THE METAL BECAUSE IT WAS HISTORIC FABRIC.SO IT IS TOTALLY CONGRUENT WITH THE, UM, UH, FIFTIES AND SIXTIES, UM, OF THE MOST ADJACENT BUILDINGS.
I, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S ANOTHER METAL STRUCTURE IN NEWBURN, BUT I DON'T SEE IT AS BEING CONGRUENT WITH THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION.
I'VE READ THE GUIDELINES DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU DO.
I GUESS I, TO ME, IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE LOGICAL TO MAKE A CINDER BLOCK, BUILDING THE CHANGE IN MATERIAL AND, AND THE PICTURE REALLY DOESN'T PORTRAY MUCH OF A FUTURE FOR THE, FOR THE APPEARANCE OF THE SIDING OF THAT BUILDING.
IT WOULD ALL PROBABLY BE PULLED TOGETHER WITH PAINT.
I'M THINKING NAVY BLUE PAINT WITH WOOD.
UM, SO IT WOULD BE A BEAUTIFUL, THIS IS, UM, A NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH HAS NOT BEEN TRAVELED BY MOST PEOPLE IN NEW VERNON, RECENT YEARS.
UM, IT IS NOT CONVERSE WITH MANY THINGS.
I MEAN, IT'S A VERY ECLECTIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE COULD DO A VENEER PERHAPS THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.
BLOCK TAKES UP A LOT OF SPACE.
THIS IS, UM, A PROJECT, WHICH IT IS NOT OF CONCERN TO THIS COMMISSION, WHY WE'RE DOING THIS PROJECT.
UM, BUT TO PROVIDE A BATHROOM AND A BEDROOM FOR HER, A HUMAN BEING.
SO THAT IS NOT IN THE PURVIEW OR NOR IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS COMMISSION.
UM, BUT TO TAKE AWAY VERY PRECIOUS SPACE WOULD MAKE IT, UM, KIND OF NONSENSICAL TO US TO DO BLOCK, UM, WHEN WE WOULD DO BLOCK AND THEN AGAIN, DO A WOOD WOODEN STRUCTURE AT TWICE THE MONEY TO DO THAT, WHICH AGAIN IS NOT THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS COMMISSION.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, IF WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO SOME VENEER OVER A WOOD STRUCTURE, UM, BUT HONESTLY, UM, THIS ISN'T THE RE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
THIS COMMISSION ALREADY APPROVED THE ADJACENT BUILDING NEW CONSTRUCTION, WHICH WILL HAVE METAL, UM, SIDING ON THE UPPER PART OF THE SEVENTIES BUILDING, UM, ADJACENT TO IT.
UM, IT IS AN ECLECTIC PIECE OF THE REVITALIZATION OF THE CITY.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT DISCRETION OF THIS COMMISSION WOULD ALLOW THAT KIND OF CREATIVITY, WHICH IS CLEARLY APPROPRIATE BY OUR GUIDELINES.
I HEAR YOUR, I HEAR YOUR CONCERN, MR. GATSBY.
I'VE PULLED UP ON THE SCREEN, UH, THE, UM, STREET VIEW SHOTS, UH, DOWN THIS ALLEY BETWEEN, UH, THE HOUSING PROJECT AND, UH, THE CITY LAUNDRY.
AND TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEAS TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE, THE EXAMPLES THAT SHE SHOWED AND THE ACTUAL HOUSES, UH, THE, UH, HOUSE WITH THAT WE'LL HAVE THE ADDITION.
UH, SO HERE ON THE, IN THE CENTER OF THE PHOTOGRAPH HERE IS THAT SUBJECT AREA THAT SHE USED OR THE METAL, AND THIS IS NOW GOING TO JUMP ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF THE STREET.
UH, CAUSE IT DOESN'T DO IN BETWEEN FOR SOME REASON THEN THERE IS THE BUILDING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
UM, AND IT WAS JUST BEHIND THIS CLUMP OF SHRUBS, JASON TO THE CITY LAUNDRY, WHICH IS THE MOST ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THIS PROPERTY ON THE EAST.
AND, UM, SO, AND THIS PHOTO IS FROM 2007, SO IT'S CERTAINLY, PROBABLY DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THAT ANYMORE TODAY, BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT, YOU SAY THAT'S A NEAREST ADJACENT, BUT IT'S LIKE NOT RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO IT.
WELL, SO BUILD AN EXTRAORDINARY WAS A WHITE CINDER BLOCK BUILDING TO ITS LEFT.
SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT CLOSE TO THE CITY LAUNDRY.
SO THIS BUILDING, IT BACKS UP TO IT.
SO WE'D LOOK AT THE AERIAL VIEW, WHICH IS NOT THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE.
YOU JUST TOLD US THAT, RIGHT? SO IT'S THIS AREA HERE.
[00:40:04]
AND SO THREE 20 IS SHOWN HERE.THAT'S THE THREE 18 IS THE ACTUAL ADDRESS.
UH, THAT'S THE BUILDING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND THAT ADDITION IS WHERE IT SAYS, TAP THAT DISTILLERY RIGHT THERE.
SO YEAH, THAT'S THIS SECTION HERE.
SO IT'S, I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S ACROSS TOWN OR IN AN, EVEN IN ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD OR A PORTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THE BIG WHITE BUILDING IS BETWEEN THE DISTILLERY AND THIS BUILDING THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ON LIBERTY, CORRECT.
WHAT YOU PROBABLY WOULD RECOGNIZE IS TAP THAT IS 2 43 FLEET AND THE ARTIST STUDIOS IN FRONT, UM, THE WHITE, UM, FLAT ROOF, WHICH YOU SEE THERE IS THE BACK WAREHOUSE OF THE CITY LAUNDRY WHERE MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE AND, UH, IN A THIRD OF THAT BUILDING AND HAVE, UH, TWO THIRDS OF THAT BUILDING AS ARTISTS, STUDIOS, AND STORAGE.
SO, BUT FROM THE CITY'S POINT OF VIEW, IT IS, AND HISTORICALLY IT IS ALL CONSIDERED, UM, BOTH THE WHITE, THE BACK WAREHOUSE AND THE FRONT WAREHOUSE, UM, AS THE CITY LAUNDRY IN ITS HISTORIC CONTEXT.
AND SO AGAIN, WHAT IS YOUR REASONING FOR NOT CONTINUING WITH THE CINDER BLOCK, WHICH IS WHAT THIS HOUSE IS ORIGINALLY MADE OF WHAT AGAIN, SAY A REASON, NOT IT'S A MASSIVE CINDERBLOCK IS VERY MASSIVE.
UM, WHAT WE HAVE COME TO KNOW THE NOISE ORDINANCE IN OUR CITY, WE'VE COME TO KNOW SOUND ISSUES.
WE'VE COME TO KNOW A LOT OF THINGS, UM, LIVING IN DOWNTOWN AREA ON METCALF AND NOW IN WALT BELLAMY.
AND SO TO HAVE, UH, CINDER BLOCKS WOULD REQUIRE, UM, CINDER BLOCK AND ADDITIONALLY, A WOOD STRUCTURE WITH, UM, INSULATION.
AND AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COMMISSION DOES NOT CARE ABOUT MONEY OR BUDGET FOR CITIZENS, BUT IT REQUIRES TWICE THE STRUCTURE.
UM, IT TAKES, IT WOULD TAKE, UH, UM, I MEAN, THIS IS A 25 19, UM, ROOM ADDITION, SO CINDERBLOCK WOULD TAKE UP EIGHT, 16 PLUS ANOTHER.
IT WOULD TAKE UP PRECIOUS SPACE FOR THE, UM, PROJECT, UM, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO US.
I MEAN, IF I SUPPOSE WE COULD DO, UM, WOOD ON THE OUTSIDE, WHICH WAS ALSO A PERIOD, BUT CLEARLY THE METAL WAS PERIOD IN THE 1950S ON THE CITY LAUNDRY AND JOHN WOOD FROM THE STATE PRESERVATION OFFICE WOULD NOT ALLOW US TO TAKE DOWN THAT.
I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN THERE.
SO HOW HAS METAL GONNA BE INSULA? YOU TALK ABOUT INSULATION, HOW IS METAL BECAUSE YOU DO A WOODS, WILL YOU DO A WOOD-FRAME YOU INSULATED, YOU HAVE YOUR EXTERIOR PIECE, YOU HAVE METAL, UM, YOU HAVE, I'M SURE, PERHAPS MR. YURI WHO'S AN ARCHITECT COULD BETTER RESPOND TO SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.
UM, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, PART OF THIS IS TO SAVE SPACE WITHIN THE STRUCTURE.
UM, NOT TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A BATHROOM FOR SOMEONE WHO'S LIVED IN A STRUCTURE FOR 35 YEARS WITHOUT A SHOWER, ANY OTHER, SO IS THERE ANY OTHER SIDING THAT YOU ALL LIKE, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH WOOD? IS THERE ANOTHER PARTY FOR, WELL NOW I'M ON A PASS ON TALKING ABOUT INSTALLATION.
IF YOU DON'T MIND HIM TO KNOW THIS MAY OR MAY NOT HELP US, BUT I WOULD BASED ON THE INTERPRETATION OF A SENTENCE IN OUR OVERVIEW AND CONCEPTS CONSIDER THIS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, RIGHT? AND STAFF GAVE A LITTLE ORIENTATION TO WHAT THE RECORD CHECK AND THE REASON I WOULD SAY IT'S NON-CONTRIBUTING ON PAGE ONE, DASH EIGHT, THEY CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IS AT LEAST 50 YEARS OLD, WHICH THIS IS, AND IS LISTED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIORS, HISTORIC DISTRICT INVENTORY OF STRUCTURES, WHICH IS OUR NOMINATION LETTER, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
SO IT'S NOT LISTED IN NOMINATION LETTER, THEREFORE DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE.
AND, UH, NOT FURTHER SUGGESTS WE HAVE A PROCESS TO MAKE IT CONTRIBUTING IF WE SHOULD CHOOSE TO DO SO, BUT I'M NOT SURE THIS WOULD QUALIFY
[00:45:02]
IN MY OPINION, SO THAT, SO THAT LENDS TO OUR LIFE, BUT WHAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR, IN TERMS OF THE HIERARCHY OF MATERIALS.IT'S, DOESN'T SAY, HAS THIS BEEN, THE MATERIALS ARE SORT OF THIS HIERARCHY.
AND SO THEN MAYBE UNDER ADDITIONS, UM, 3.3 0.3, UM, ON ONE HAND, IS THAT THE CORE OF THE DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING TALKING ABOUT MATERIALS.
UM, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, UH, IT TALKS ABOUT, UM, UH, ARCHITECTURAL EMBELLISHMENTS AND DETAILING ARE OFTEN SIMPLIFIED AND SECONDARY AND TERTIARY ABCS.
AND I REALIZED I'M STRETCHING THINGS HERE A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE'VE GOT, UH, UH, LESS THAN ORDINATE STRUCTURE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S ALMOST LIKE A UTILITY BUILDING IN A LOT OF WAYS, MAYBE MORE LIKE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
UH, AND SO THAT'S WHERE I KIND OF FIND MYSELF BEING MAYBE NOT ENTIRELY COMFORTABLE WITH THE PROPOSAL, BUT ALSO I COULD SEE WHERE, UM, PERHAPS A DIFFERENT SIDING THAT WE WERE, WE'RE A MATERIAL THAT WE WERE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH WOULD STILL BE JUST AS STARKLY DIFFERENT, UH, RELATIVE TO THE CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS, WHICH, UM, AGAIN ARE ANOTHER ANOMALY.
THE GENERALLY THAT WOULD, WOULD NEVER HAPPEN IN THE DISTRICT, EXCEPT OF COURSE IT HAS.
AND SO THAT'S, WHAT'S COMPLICATING OUR DECISION AND IT ALSO SAYS EXTEND THE ARCHITECTURAL HIERARCHY DEPARTMENT STRUCTURE TO THE EDITION.
SO THAT HIERARCHY ISN'T MEAN COPY ALL THE MATERIALS, WE'VE GOT SOME EAVES, RIGHT.
AND WE'VE GOT SOME GABLES, UH, I COULD SEE WHERE MAYBE THAT BOX IS CHECKED, THE LIKE MATERIALS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE STRUCTURE.
THAT SEEMS TO BE AT WHAT I HEAR YOU STRUGGLING TO SEND THE BLOCK I'M GOING.
I WOULD NOT SAY THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CENTER BLOCK.
I THINK, UH, OUR WE'RE USED TO SEEING WOOD LEFT SIDING.
WE'D PROBABLY BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH A LAP SIGNING.
UM, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION, IS THERE A SIDE HURTING? CAUSE YOU CAN SEE WHY THAT IS NOT AN EFFICIENT USE OF THE SMALL SPACE THEY'RE TRYING TO CREATE.
AND, UM, SO WOULD SOMETHING BESIDES SIMPLE CAUSE MEAN WHAT WOULD THEY DO IF THAT THEN WOULD THEY DO LIKE AN APPLIED CINDERBLOCK SOMETHING THAT LOOKED LIKE SNOW BLOCK? I, I DON'T, I FEEL LIKE IF IT WAS WOOD SIDING, YOU'D BE USED TO THAT.
AND BECAUSE IT'S METAL, IT'S A LITTLE AND CATHY, IF YOU, WOULD WE TALKING ABOUT METAL SIDING OR WE TALKING ABOUT LIKE ROOFING, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT BIG SHEETS OF METAL? AND IF SO, HOW BIG ARE THEY? AND IS IT, AND A LOT OF DIFFERENT SIZES AND PANELS, A LOT OF DIFFERENT COLORS, QUITE FRANKLY.
UM, AGAIN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURES THAT MR SHELLEY HAD OF THE EXISTING, UH, ADJACENT BUILDING WITH HIS METAL SIDING, AND, UM, I HEAR THAT THIS COMMISSION IS NOT ACCEPTING THAT PERHAPS IS AS HISTORIC FABRIC, BUT IT IS, IT'S BEEN THERE FOR 70 YEARS.
BUT I THINK THAT THE, I THINK CATHERINE, MAYBE THE ONE THING THAT MAKES IT HARD IN THAT IT'S MORE OF A, SORT OF AN INDUSTRIAL COMMUTE COMMERCIAL USE VERSUS A RESIDENTIAL USE OF THE METAL.
SO MAYBE THAT MAY BE THE THING THAT JUST
SO ON THE SIZE, UM, TO THE BLOCK OR THE, UM, BRICK, UM, FROM THE BASE OF THE HOUSE TO WHATEVER EIGHT, 10, WHATEVER IT IS.
UM, SO IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE HARMONIOUS WITHIN THIS COMPLETE SITE.
UM, AGAIN, THAT IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION, UH, WHICH YOU HAVE DIFFERENT REGULATIONS FOR, THIS IS AN ADDITION TO A, A GREAT HISTORIC STRUCTURE TO BE PRESERVED.
UM, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE INCONGRUOUS TO THE ACTUAL TOTAL SITE OF A LOCATED IN A REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
[00:50:01]
I MEAN, AGAIN, THIS IS NOT, UM, UH, THIS IS PART OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.SO, AND WITH TRENT COURT IS, IS DEMOLISHED.
ALL OF THAT WILL BE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO WE WILL, THIS WILL BE THE PROBABLY CLOSEST EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE ON LIBERTY STREET.
SO THESE WOULD BE STRIPS OF METAL ATTACHED VERTICALLY, AS OPPOSED TO HORIZONTAL.
AND HOW WIDE ARE THEY? THE STRIPS? I BROUGHT THE MATERIAL TO THE DESIGN REVIEW.
UM, I'VE ALWAYS GOT PICTURES OF THAT.
I BROUGHT, I DIDN'T THINK I NEEDED TO BRING IT AGAIN.
UM, WHAT I'M GETTING AT, IT'S NOT LIKE THE ROOF METAL ROOFING METAL.
YEAH, ABSOLUTELY ROOFING AND METAL AND, AND CITING ARE VERY SIMILAR.
THEY'RE METAL PIECES THAT ARE ADHERED TO EITHER THE TOP OF A BUILDING OR THE SIDE OF A BUILDING.
UM, UM, CURRENTLY I'M LOOKING AT A THREE 16 LIBERTY AND THE AREA THAT I'M SEEING THAT IT'S METAL WILL BE CONTRIBUTING TO THE ROOF IS MOSTLY THE ROOF DOWN HALFWAY.
UM, WHERE IN THIS CASE YOU'RE PROPOSING THE WHOLE SOCIETY TO BE METAL.
THAT IS THE, THIS ONE THAT I WILL BE STANDING AT.
WHERE'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, UM, WHERE THIS WOULD BE MORE, THREE 16 WOULD BE MORE ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE IT'S MIMICKING THE WHOLE ROOF LINE.
WHEREAS THIS ONE IS THE ENTIRE SIDE.
THAT'S WHERE THE ISSUE IS MADAM CHAIR IN THE SPIRIT OF BEING HELPFUL IN YOUR DISCUSSION.
IF THE MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION ARE STRUGGLING WITH WHETHER THE APPLICATION AS PRESENTED, WHETHER THE ELEMENTS ARE CONGRUENT OR THINKING GROOVES WITH THE DISTRICT, PERHAPS THIS IS A MOMENT TO PAUSE.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT IS, UM, CONSIDERING IN AN, OR IS OPEN TO MODIFYING THE APPLICATION IN SOME WAY TO BETTER, UM, SATISFY THESE MEMBERS AND BETTER, UM, FIT IN WITH OUR GUIDELINES.
SO IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER WHETHER YOU WOULD CONTINUE THIS APPLICATION TO THE JULY MEETING.
UM, OR IF THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT YOU CAN RESOLVE TONIGHT, YOU CERTAINLY CAN RESOLVE IT TONIGHT.
I HOPE WE CAN RESOLVE IT TONIGHT.
UM, I MONTHS AND MONTHS GO BY, UM, WITH THESE PROCESSES AND WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT.
SO, UM, I'M OPEN TO HEARING THE COMMISSIONS.
YOU KNOW, I HEARD MR. BRYANT CLEARLY AT THE DESIGN REVIEW, WE EXPRESS THOSE POINTS OF VIEW.
SO, UM, I, UM, WOULD YOU CONSIDER A WOOD LAP SIDING? ABSOLUTELY.
I WOULD YOU CONSIDER HARDY BOARD? WE DO.
WOULD YOU DO HORRIBLE? NO, WE DON'T DO IT.
ON ADDITION, WE DO HARD CONSTRUCTION
I UNDERSTAND
YOU'RE GOOD AT SOLVING PROBLEMS, BUT I'M PRETTY GOOD AT MUDDYING THE WATERS.
SO UNDER MASONRY GUIDELINE 5.1 0.5, UM, UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, UH, OUR, OUR, THAT GUIDELINE WOULD DICTATE THAT THE VENEER OF BRICK, STUCCO OR OTHER APPROPRIATE MATERIAL BE APPLIED OVER CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS.
SO I JUST MENTIONED THAT, SAY THAT AGAIN, WHICH IS WHICH GUIDELINE 5.1 0.5.
SO, YOU KNOW, ON ONE HAND, I APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, THE CONSISTENCY OF DERIVING THE MATERIAL FROM THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
I GET A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE MAKING THE LEAP IN THIS CASE TO REQUIRING SOMETHING THAT WE USUALLY WOULDN'T ALLOW.
IT'S A LITTLE CONTRADICTORY IN MY THINKING.
SO, UM, SO AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I KEEP COMING BACK TO THE SIMPLICITY OF THE BUILDING, RIGHT? AND THAT BEING MORE AND BEING MORE
[00:55:01]
AKIN TO AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THEN, UH, A PRIMER, IT IS A PRIMARY STRUCTURE IN THIS CASE, BUT IT'S REALLY MORE, MORE AGAIN, TO AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHERE MAYBE WE, WE SEE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING MORE OFTEN.LIKE WHAT, WHAT THOSE MATERIALS ARE THAT YOU JUST READ ABOUT? YOU SAID MASONRY WELL UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, IF WE WERE TO BUILD A NEW MASONRY WALL, WE GUIDELINE 5.1 0.5 WOULD REQUIRE A CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT TO BE FACED WITH A VENEER OF BRICK, STUCCO, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE MATERIAL, WHATEVER THAT IS IT'S NOT INTENDED TO BE FINISHED WITH.
BUT MY, MY CONCERN ABOUT THE METALS IS THE DIFFERENCE FOR ONE.
BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THE METAL SIDING ON THE BUILDING THAT YOU SITE, I SEE US ALLOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OR IN THE NEAR FUTURE, A THIRD WORLD CONSTRUCTION HERE, RIGHT.
AND I, I JUST, I CANNOT AGREE TO THAT IF WE COME UP WITH A MODERN MATERIAL THAT WILL, WE'LL MAKE THAT BUILDING, I GUESS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT COLLABORATIVE SIDE LOOK WELL, RIGHT IN THE FURNITURE.
YEAH, I'M LOST IS HARD WORD ON OR OFF THE TABLE OFF.
THE THINK ARTICLE IS OFF THE TABLE.
UH, THE COLLABORATIVE SIDING WOULD BE A SIMILAR CITATION.
SEEMS LIKE WHAT YOU COULD GET WOODSIDE WOODSIDE SEEMS LIKE IT.
OH, I'M NOT GOING TO WAIT ANOTHER MONTH.
SO AM I HEARING THAT WE CITED AS APPROPRIATE, WHICH WAS CERTAINLY USED IN THIS DISTRICT ALL DAY LONG.
THAT'D BE MY INTERPRETATION, BUT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SUBMISSION PINS HERE.
CLEARLY THE CONFUSION FROM, UM, CITIZENS WHO ARE NOT AS KNOWLEDGEABLE AS ALL OF YOU, AND I'M UNDERSTANDING THESE ISSUES AND I'M NOT BEEN BEFORE THIS COMMISSION AND PROBABLY A DECADE.
UM, SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THESE ISSUES IN PARTICULARLY IN THE REDEVELOPMENT, UM, AREA WHERE I WOULD, WELL, MOST OF IT IS NOT EVEN IN YOUR PURVIEW.
IT IS, UH, GOING TO BE, UM, A TOTALLY DIFFERENT DEAL ACROSS THE STREET.
THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT DEAL.
YOU HAVE ONE OF THE OLDEST STRUCTURES IN THIS CITY TO BE PRESERVED.
SO, BUT, UM, IT IS CONFUSING TO ME TOO.
I JUST WANTED TO, I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT HUSTLE MEANT OF THOSE OF US IN THE PUBLIC WHO SEE, UM, 70 YEARS OF A MATERIAL THAT WAS USED, NOT IN A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY, BUT IN A VERY, UH, IN THE CENTER OF THIS CITY AND THE CITY OF LAUNDRY.
UM, NOW NOT BEING ABLE TO BE USED A MATERIAL THAT IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT FOR 50 YEARS, UH, METAL WILL, UH, LAST LONGER THAN I, BUT WE CAN'T CHANGE THE PAST.
UM, SO KATHY, YOU ARE INTERESTED IN GETTING, HAVING SOME SORT OF APPROVAL TONIGHT.
SO THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT APPLICATION OR COME BACK.
AND SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT WHAT WE PROPOSE, UH, NOT WITH METAL SIDING, BUT WITH, WITH SIDING IS GOING TO, I MEAN, THIS, THIS IS FOR THIS COMMISSION TO CONTINUE TO DISCUSS.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR ANYBODY ELSE.
YOU OKAY WITH THAT? YOU MIGHT WANT TO ASK THAT FELLA DOWN THERE.
HE'S ON HIS, GOT SOME QUESTIONS HE MIGHT BE OKAY.
IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE YOU FROM USING PRESSURE TREATED WOOD, BY THE WAY, SINCE YOU'RE GOING TO PAINT IT OR SAYING IT DIDN'T GO.
SO THAT MIGHT SOLVE SOME OF THE OTHER PROBLEMS YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT.
SO WE CAN MAKE IT A PROPOSAL WITH A DIFFERENT MATERIAL AS A CONDITION OF THIS PROJECT.
THAT'S HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.
AND YOU'RE SURE YOU WANT TO DO THAT TONIGHT.
CAUSE WE'RE NOT PRESSURING YOU TO DO THAT.
I'M NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR
BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.
SO THE MATERIAL THAT, THAT WE, OUR SUGGESTION IS WOODSIDE AND WITH PRESSURE WOULD
[01:00:03]
COLLABORATESO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE COME TO IS ITCHING WHERE WE'RE HAPPY WITH THAT.
MADAM CHAIR, JUST AS A POINT OF CLARITY, IS THE APPLICANT AMENDING HER APPLICATION TO INCLUDE THE WOOD CLAPPER AND SIDING AS THE EXTERIOR COVER FOR IT'S A STRUCTURE.
I BELIEVE THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND AGREEING TO WHATEVER IS LEGALLY APPROPRIATE, WE WOULD DEMAND FOR COUNSEL.
SO THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE AGREEING TO.
SO WE'RE ALL CLEAR AND WHOEVER'S GOING TO MAKE THE PROPOSAL WELL, HAVE TO IDENTIFY THE CHANGE IN THE MATERIALS OF THE SIDE.
WE'LL, WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON THAT TO GO FORWARD.
ANYBODY, NOT THAT I DON'T HEAR ANY WORK, SO WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE PROPOSAL WOULD THAT CONDITION? SO I MOVED THAT WE FIND THE APPLICATION FOR THREE 18 LIBERTY STREET, UH, FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, NOT IN CONGRUENCE WITH NEW BERN'S CODE OF ORDINANCES, SECTION 15 FOR 11 15, 4 29.
AND THEY BURNED HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING, UH, UH, GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS OF FACT DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 3.1 0.2 3.1 0.4 AND 3.1 0.5 MODIFICATIONS 3.2 0.1 3.2 0.2 ADDITIONS 3.3 0.1 3.3 0.2 3.3 0.3, A WALLS TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.4.
AND COINCIDENTALLY THAT SPEAKS OF THE WOOD TRIMS AND SIDING, UH, THAT WE HAVE AMENDED, UH, TONIGHT IN THE APPLICATION.
UM, WHAT DOORS, WINDOWS, DOORS AND OPENINGS 4.3 0.2 5.2 0.1 5.2 0.2 PAINT 5.42 5.4 0.3 AND 5.4 0.4.
THE REASON BEING THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN A TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
UM, BEING AN ADDITION, UH, UH, WERE CARRYING OVER SOME OF THE BASIC FORMS THAT ARE PRESENT ON THE EXISTING BUILDING, PARTICULARLY THE, THE EAVES AND OVERHANGS, UM, LET'S SEE, PRESENT, SMELL AND STORAGE, UH, THE DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS, UH, AS AMENDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE GUIDELINES, UM, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND THEN LASTLY, UH, THE PROJECT IS NOT AN ENGROSSED WITH THE GUIDELINES WITH THE CONDITION THAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE APPLICATION IS AMENDED TO ALREADY INCLUDE THE WOODSIDE AND GUIDELINE AS REFERENCED IN 4.2 0.4.
I'LL SECOND THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SECOND THAT OKAY.
ALL OPPOSED HEARING NONE IT PASS.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ISSUE A COS? GOOD.
WE GOT UP AND WE GOT A MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SORRY, ONE SECOND HERE.
[3.D. 101 King St. – to include demolishing the existing non-contributing house and replacing it with a new infill house.]
OKAY.SO OUR NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS 1 0 1 KING STREET.
SO HERE IS THE APPLICATION OR ONE-ON-ONE KING STREET AWARD AND SARAH ZIMMERMAN.
UH, THIS IS, THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE, UH, AND REPLACE IT WITH A MODERN HOUSE.
AND HERE THEY HAVE THEIR LIST OF VARIOUS GUIDELINES AND A FEW OF THE MATERIALS LISTED THERE.
THEN, UM, ALL THE VARIOUS CHECK BOXES, SIGNATURE AND DATE OF THEIR DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, WHO IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED ON THIS FORM
[01:05:01]
TO REPRESENT THEM SARAH ALPHA BUCK.SO, UM, THEY BEGIN WITH AN INTRODUCTORY LETTER, UH, WHERE THEY, UH, UH, INDICATE FIRST OF ALL, IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH HERE ABOUT THE FLOOD PLAIN ISSUES.
AND THEN, UH, THEY DISCUSSED SOME OF THE VARIOUS, UH, GUIDELINES UNDER DESIGN PRINCIPLES FIRST, AND THEN SECONDLY, UH, FOR INFILL CONSTRUCTION.
UH, AND THEN THEY ALSO DISCUSS, UH, TO THE OTHER ISSUES, UH, ABOUT THE GARAGE AND ALSO, UH, SOME OF THE TIGHT WE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN ISSUES AS WELL.
UM, THIS FIRST PAGE OF THE DRAWINGS SHOWS THE EXISTING HOUSE, UH, THAT IS TO BE DEMOLISHED.
UH, AND IT'S MORE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THAT LOWER RIGHT SHIP AS AN AREA OF SHOWING NOT ONLY THE HOUSE ITSELF, BUT SOME OF THE NEIGHBORING BUILDINGS AS WELL, BRING THE HOMES.
UH, THE UPPER LEFT IS NOW A STRAIGHT DOWN AERIAL SHOWING IN THE UPPER CENTER PORTION IS THE EXISTING, UH, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND THEN, UH, SOME OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES ARE AS WELL.
WHAT THE NUMBERS MEAN THERE, BUT THEN, UM, THESE ARE VIEWS DOWN THE STREET.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, DOWN KING STREET IN THE UPPER CENTER PICTURE, UH, DOWN KING STREET TOWARDS THE RIVER.
UH, I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY ZOOM IN ON THESE IS, THEY'RE NOT THAT HELPFUL IF YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE THEM.
SO COMING DOWN KING STREET, UH, AND, UM, THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED ABOUT THE PUMP STATION.
THAT'S ACTUALLY DEAD CENTER ON THE END OF THE STREET, WHICH NOW YOU CAN SEE IN THIS VIEW HERE IN THE UPPER, RIGHT? WHAT THE HOUSE, SUBJECT HOUSE ON THE RIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW, I'M PUTTING DOWN.
UM, LET'S SEE, I'M GOING TO GO TO THE LEFT FIRST.
SO DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT HOUSE IS, UM, THE REAR YARDS OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINES OF THE HOUSES ALONG EAST FRONT STREET.
AND THIS IS A GARAGE OR ONE OF THEM WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE THIRD APPLICATION TONIGHT.
UM, FURTHER DOWN THE STREET IS ANOTHER, UM, UH, DRIVEWAY AND GARAGE OFF OF EDGERTON.
AND THEN LASTLY, ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT, UH, OR TO THE US, BUT IS, IS, UH, THIS LAST, UH, ALSO FREESTANDING STRUCTURE.
UM, SO THEN WE HAVE SOME VIEWS OF SOME OF THE ADJACENT, UH, HOMES.
SO THIS PHOTO ON THE UPPER RIGHT IS THE ONE AT 600 ENTERED 10 RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED THERE AT THE OPPOSITE END OF EDMONTON.
THE NEXT ONE TO THE LEFT, THE EDGERTON OR TO THE NORTH IS 6 0 6 EDGERTON.
AND THIS IS ESSENTIALLY ALL YOU SEE FROM THE STREET, SORRY.
UH, AND SHOWING THE ATTACHED GARAGE THERE.
THEN AT SIX 30, THE NEXT, THE THIRD HOUSE OVER IN THE DIRECT NEIGHBOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SIX 30 EDGERTON.
AND HERE WE ALSO SEE, UM, THAT HOUSE AND INCLUDING IT'S ATTACHED DOUBLE GARAGE.
SO SOME OTHER, UH, PROPERTIES THAT THEY MENTIONED ARE THIS ONE AT THE BASE OF POLLOCK STREET, RIGHT AT THE RIVER.
UM, THIS IS, UH, UH, ALSO SUBJECT TO THE, UH, FLOODING AND SUCH.
AND SO YOU CAN SEE HOW, UH, THE LIVING AREAS ARE BEGIN AT THE UPPER LEVEL OR THE SECOND FLOOR, ESSENTIALLY A GROUND LEVEL AND THE GROUND LEVEL USES, UH, ATTACHED PARKING, UM, FIVE 16 EAST FRONT STREET.
UM, ALSO HAS SOME ATTACHED GARAGE PARKING HERE AND TWO 16 JOHNSON STREET.
SO, UM, FIVE 16 HE'S FRONT STREET.
CAN'T REMEMBER, DOES THAT, THAT ONE MADE THAT ONE'S PROBABLY IN THE FLOOD PLAIN, UH, DON'T THINK TWO 16 JOHNSON STREET IS, SO THAT EXPLAINS WHY THE FIRST TWO ON THE LEFT ARE, UH, ELEVATED, WHEREAS THIS ONE IS ATTACHED TO THE SIDE, WHEREAS ALL OF THOSE WERE CONSTRUCTED BEFORE THE GUIDELINES.
UM, SOME MORE THAT WE'RE, UM, LOOKING AT SOME EXAMPLES, THIS HOUSE
[01:10:01]
HAS A, UH, ESSENTIALLY A SECTION OF FLAT ROOF.CAN'T TELL IF THE REST IS OR NOT, BUT, AND THAT'S NOT TRUE WERE DONE IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
SO WHICH ONES WERE DONE IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS? UH
THIS, UH, THIS WAS OPEN CARPORTS THAT WERE THERE BEFORE.
AND SO IT WAS APPROVED TO ADD THE GARAGE DOORS.
THE STRUCTURE WAS OVER THIS WHOLE HOUSE WAS RAISED.
WHICH ONE THEY CALL THAT HOUSE, THE BELL HOUSE.
UM, SO INTERESTING, BUT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO.
CAUSE IT WAS NOT WHILE I WAS SCREAMING THAT'S AND A HALF TO THREE YEARS, BUT NEVERTHELESS, UH, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN DURING THE CURRENT, UH, ADDITION OF YOUR GUIDANCE.
UH, SO THEN, UM, THIS ONE, UH, ALSO APPARENTLY A FLAT ROOF, UM, OR IT SEEMS TO BE FLAT ROOF AND CERTAINLY ON THE RIGHT SIDE, I BELIEVE.
UM, BUT ALSO THE SCALE AND MASS IS WHAT THEY'RE POINTING OUT ON THIS, AS WELL AS THE SCALE AND MASS ON THIS AND A FLAT ROOF.
IT SEEMS ON THAT IT'S MORE HISTORIC HOMES WITH FLAT ROOF ON THIS ONE ON THE LEFT STUCCO, EXTERIOR.
UM, I BELIEVE EVEN THE COINS ON THE CORNERS ARE STUCK OUT.
PLEASE GO TO THE MICROPHONE SO WE CAN MAKE SURE EVERYONE HEARS THIS.
SO, AND THEN LASTLY, HERE WE HAVE A SOMEWHAT MODERN D A MODERN DESIGN TREATMENT ON THIS HOUSE HERE, ESPECIALLY WITH THESE HORIZONTAL CORNER WINDOWS ON LINDEN STREET, WHICH FAIRNESS WAS NOT APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION, THAT WASN'T A FAIRNESS THAT WASN'T APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.
AND THAT WAS, YEAH, THAT WAS LIKE, THAT'S THE FAIRNESS THAT WASN'T.
SO, UH, MS. PAGE, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, UH, THE NEW PLAN FOR THE SITE.
UM, SO, UH, I, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE PROPERTY IS RELATIVELY NARROW AND DEEP, UM, WITH, UH, CONCRETE BULKHEAD AT THE BACK, BUT THEN, UH, AN AREA OF, UH, WHERE THE BULKHEAD HAS ENDED AND A ROCK JETTY CONTINUES OUT.
SO THERE'S, UM, SOME WATER AREA ON THE PROPERTY, RIGHT? OH, UH, HOWEVER IS THE PROPERTY LINE, THE DASH LINE.
UM, AND HOPEFULLY THAT THE CANDLE LINE, THE ONE THAT DASH LINE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT HERE, I THINK IT SHOWS A LOT LINES PER THE SUBDIVISION MAP, BUT, UM, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT WAS YOU'RE THEIR PROPERTY LINE DOES INCLUDE THAT BULKHEAD.
AND I REMEMBER THE SUBDIVISION WAS DONE LIKE IN THIS, IN THE FIFTIES OR THE FORTIES OR SOMETHING, SO QUITE A WAYS BACK, AND IT COULD BE EVEN THE ADDITIONAL LAND WAS ADDED AND, YOU KNOW, THOSE DASH LINES JUST LIKE ON THE HICKS PROPERTY, THEY ALSO HAD FOUR LOTS.
AND THIS HAS FOUR LOTS OF, I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT REALLY LOTS.
YOU COULDN'T BUILD ON THEM, BUT 14, 15, 16, 17.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE SOME SORT OF INTERNAL LINE TO WHAT, WHATEVER SURVEYOR DID THERE, BUT THEIR PROPERTY IS USING IS THAT AROUND THE BULKHEAD.
UM, AND, UM, THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK IS CLEAR HERE.
AND OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE VERY CLEAR ON THE RIGHT.
SO THIS IS OUR, THE FLOOR PLAN FOR THE, THE GROUND LEVEL.
UH, AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION EARLIER ABOUT THE ENTRANCE DOOR, BUT THERE, AND THERE'S A STAIRWAY IMMEDIATELY, UM, TO THE RIGHT OF THE ENTRANCE DOOR, ANIMALS, ELEVATOR,
[01:15:03]
AND THEN ON THE BACK, UH, SOME SLIDING DOORS, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, EVERYTHING IS SOLID WALLS.THEN THE MAIN FLOOR, UH, UH, HAS, AS FAR AS WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING ON THE FRONT, UH, TWO WINDOWS ON THE FRONT AND A SERIES OF SLIDING GLASS DOORS AND A PORCH ON THE BACK, A LAP POOL AND A GLASS RAIL.
THERE IS, UM, TWO WINDOWS ON THIS LEFT SIDE AND ONE TINY WINDOW ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
SO THE SECOND LIVING LEVEL LIVING FLOOR, UM, HAS A LARGER BALCONY ON THE FRONT FIRST FOR THE GLASS RAIL ON THE FRONT OF THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THIS, THIS NARROW PORTION.
BUT THEN I BELIEVE A, UH, A KNEE WALL ESSENTIALLY FOR THE RAILING OR A SOLID RAIL FROM THE BALCONY ON THE LEFT HERE.
AND THE BACK OF THE HOUSE HAS THIS VERY LARGE WHITE PORCH WITH GLASS RAIL.
UH, THAT PORCH IS NARROWER THAN THE ONE BELOW IT, WHICH YOU SEE IS THE OTHER RECTANGLE.
UH, THERE ARE MORE WINDOWS HERE ON THE LEFT SIDE, UH, ON THE FRONT.
UH, AND THEN, UH, ALSO TO THEN JUST THE TINY WINDOW ON THE RIGHT, UH, STAIRWELL.
AND THEN THE ROOF LEVEL ACTUALLY HAS, UH, UM, NOT ROOF.
THE TOP FLOOR, I GUESS, IS A MECHANICAL ROOM UP HERE, UH, WITH DOUBLE DOORS AND A PATIO OUT, UH, ONTO THE ROOF OF THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
AND THERE'S ALSO A PATIO ON THE RIGHT CORNER AS WELL.
UH, WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS THE BALCONY BELOW, AS WELL AS THE DECK AND SUCH NO, THERE IS NO PROTECTOR, CORRECT.
SO HERE WE HAVE SOME RENDERINGS, UM, OF THE DESIGN, UM, SOME CHANGES SINCE THE DESIGNER VIEW, UH, MEETING.
AND, UH, WE CAN, WE'LL PROBABLY END UP TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THESE.
UM, SO LET'S GO ON TO THE NEXT ONE.
WE KNOW THOSE WERE THERE, THERE WAS A MORE PHOTO-REALISTIC RENDERING UH, THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS ON THE LEFT AND THEN SOME MATERIAL SAMPLES ON THE RIGHT AND THEN THE LEFT AND RIGHT ELEVATIONS.
SO THE, UH, YOU CAN SEE THE LARGE DECK BALCONIES OUT THE BACK ON BOTH OF THESE.
SO THIS WOULD BE THE, UM, SOUTH ELEVATION, AND THIS WOULD BE THE NORTH ELEVATION, UH, THE NORTH ELEVATION THEN FACING THE PUMP STATION ESSENTIALLY, UM, HAS MORE WINDOWS THAN THE, UH, ONE FACING THE NEIGHBOR AND THEN THE REAR ELEVATION WITH THE LAR LARGE, LONG DECKS AND THE SAMPLE UP WHAT THE RAILING WOULD LOOK LIKE.
AND THEN FINALLY THEN, UH, THIS IS A ACTUAL PLAN OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.
UH, AND THEN THE ELEVATION CERTIFICATE, UM, INFORMATION HERE.
FIRST SHOW SOME PHOTOS AND SOME OF THE REST OF THE INFORMATION TO INDICATE WHAT THE ACTUAL GROUND LEVEL IS ABOVE SEA LEVEL, AS WELL AS THE EXISTING, UH, FIRST, UH, FLOOR OF BUILDINGS.
SO, UM, WE HAVE SWINE CAN READ THIS, THE ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REPORT FOR 1 0 1 KING STREET, UH, THAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR SAYS IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE AND CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR.
OF COURSE, THAT IT WILL REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT.
SO THEN I'M READY FOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN YOU ARE.
ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST WITH THIS PROPOSAL? YES.
SO CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO REMOVE HIM FROM OUR BOARD, MADAM CHAIR, THE MEMBER WOULD NEED TO STATE THE NATURE OF HIS CONFLICT? WELL, AT THE STADIUM, AS YOU KNOW, I'M A REALTOR AND I HAVE BEEN INSIDE OF ONE-ON-ONE KING STREET WHEN IT WAS ON THE MARKET, ONE OF MY BUYERS.
AND THERE WAS ALSO A DOCUMENT THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED OR IS THIS AN ASSISTANCE THAT IS MISSING OUT OF THE FILES THAT I'M
[01:20:01]
AWARE OF? SO THEREFORE, UM, UH, A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.IT SOUNDS LIKE CHAIR THAT, UM, MR. BRYANT HAS EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE THAT HE'S BEEN PRIVY TO, THAT WILL IMPACT HIS ABILITY TO HEAR THE EVIDENCE TONIGHT AND BASIC DECISIONS SOLELY ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED.
SO THAT WOULD BE A COMPANY THAT WOULD BE A CONFLICT.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE HIM REMOVED SO THAT WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
IF YOU COULD HAVE A SEAT OUT IN THE AUDIENCE FOR THE TIME BEING, THANK YOU FOR LETTING US KNOW THAT ALL RIGHT.
SO DOES THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE HAVE ANY OTHER INFORMATION YOU WANT TO SHARE AT THIS TIME? UM, THE OWNERS HAVE SECURED SIGNATURES FROM ALL THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET SAYING THAT THEY ARE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPERTY.
AND MR. SHELLEY INDICATED THAT WE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO ADD THIS TO OUR, UM, APPLICATION TONIGHT.
AND, UH, ALSO SOME RENDERINGS CAME IN A LITTLE BIT LATE THAT SHOW THE TOP ROOF JUST SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.
SO I PRINTED THEM OUT AND WOULD WANT TO INCLUDE THOSE AS WELL.
SO BECCA, YOU CAN GET THAT INFORMATION TO HIM AND THEN HE CAN PASS OUT THE RENDERINGS THAT YOU WANT US TO HAVE THEM.
SO IN THE AUDIENCE, ARE THERE ANY NOTIFIED PROPONENTS OF THIS PROPOSAL IN THE AUDIENCE? ARE THERE ANY NOTIFIED OPPONENTS OF THIS PROPOSAL SEEING NONE FOR EITHER, EITHER ANYBODY IN THE AUDITORS WITH RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND STANDING THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS PROJECT, SEEING THAT, IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT IS FROM ANY STATE CITY OR GOVERNMENT BODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK HEARING NONE.
SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, LOVELY BOTTLES FOR ANY OF THAT.
SO, SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL US THE STAFF FUNDING OR OKAY.
SO, UH, THESE ARE THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FORD IN THIS ERA ZIMMERMAN FOR THEIR PROJECT AT 1 0 1 KING STREET, UH, THAT HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME IS NOT APPLICABLE AND IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
AND SO THERE IS NOTHING IN THE INVENTORY, NORTH SANDBAG.
SO THE PROJECT IS FOR 1 0 1 KING STREET TO INCLUDE DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND REPLACING IT WITH A NEW INFILL HOUSE.
SO STAFF SUMMITS, SOME FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION, WHICH CONSISTS OF TWO DELIBERATIONS IN RELATION AND NEW INFILL.
SO FOR DELIBERATION ONE, UH, FOR DEMOLITION, THE, UH, APPROPRIATE GUIDELINES ARE 6.4 0.1 AND 6.4 0.3.
UM, THERE IS ALSO A STATEMENT IN THE GUIDELINES THAT IN RENDERING A DECISION ON DEMOLITION COA, THE HPC SHOULD ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING THREE CONSIDERATIONS, UM, UH, NOTE THAT THESE WERE PROBABLY WRITTEN WITH REFERENCE TO CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
SO WE MAY HAVE TO BE A LITTLE, UM, UH, UNDERSTANDING IN THE PHRASING OF THE QUESTIONS.
UH, FIRST, UH, CONSIDERATION ONE, UH, TO ADDRESS THE HISTORICAL CULTURAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STRUCTURE.
IS IT A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WE'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED? NO.
IS IT SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE OF ITS HISTORIC USE AND EVENT A PERSON, THE BUILDER OR AN ARCHITECT? IS IT THE LAST OR THE OLDEST EXAMPLE OF A CERTAIN BUILDING TYPE CONSIDERATION TO ADDRESS THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE? WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS OF THE FOUNDATIONS FLOORS, WALLS, WINDOWS, DOORS, AND ROOFS.
AND IS IT A HAZARD, PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE? AGAIN, THIS MAY BE IN THE CONTEXT OF EXPECTING THIS TO HAVE BEEN A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AND WHETHER OR NOT IT'S RELEVANT TO REMOVE AN EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, REMEMBER THIS AS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
UH, AND, UH, TO POINT OUT THAT, UH, AS IS POINTED OUT IN GUIDELINE ABOVE 6.4 0.1 DEMOLITION OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE SHALL NOT BE DENIED BY THE HPC, UH, THREE, UH, CONSIDERATION THREE ADDRESS ATTEMPTED PRESERVATION EFFORTS.
[01:25:01]
HAS SOME REFERENCE TO CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES, BUT QUESTIONS ARE, HAVE OPTIONS FOR REHABILITATION.BEEN EXPLORED WITH PRESERVATION ORGANIZATIONS, HAS THE APPLICANT BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN SEEKING ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION AND HAVE ALTERNATIVES FOR STRUCTURE, RELOCATION AND SALE OF THE PROPERTY HAVE BEEN PURSUED? SO HAVING PRESENTED ALL OF THOSE, YOU MAY JUST WANT TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT THESE ARE INDEED RELEVANT AT ALL, AND SHOULD BE, UH, UH, UH, WAIVED IN ESSENCE IN THE PROCESS.
UM, AND SO FOR THIS PORTION, THE DEMOLITION PORCELAIN PORTION, I HAVE STATEMENTS OR REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE, THE PROJECT, HIS PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH A NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW HOUSE FOR THE PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, THE DESIGN OF WHICH WILL NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THE HPC THREE OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND FOR THE PROJECT IS NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH THE, SO THE MOTION FOR DELIBERATION ONE, WE SUGGEST WE RECOMMEND THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE DEMOLITION OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
HOWEVER, DEMOLITION MAY NOT PROCEED UNTIL THE DESIGN OF THE REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE IS APPROVED BY THE HPC AND A COA ISSUED FOR THE REPLACEMENT.
AND SO DELIBERATION TO, FOR THE NEW INFILL HOUSE, A DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, 2.1 0.12 AND THREE UTILITY IS 2.3 0.1 AND TWO DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.12, THREE AND FOUR FOR INFILL CONSTRUCTION, 3.4 0.12, THREE AND FOUR, OR FOUNDATIONS 4.1 0.4 AND SIX WALLS TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.4 ENTRANCES 4.4 0.4, MASONRY 5.1 0.5 METAL'S 5.3 0.3 AND FOUR PAINT 5.4 0.2, THREE AND FOUR.
A REASON FOR THIS ARE BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE, THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE TYPE WE'VE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OR PROPOSAL IS AN INFILL PROJECT, PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, AND CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY AND FIVE.
THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONVERSE WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO THE MOTION WE RECOMMEND FOR DELIBERATION TO IS COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A NEW INFILL HOUSE FOR THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE BUILDING PERMIT SHALL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL A COA IS ISSUED FOR EXTERIOR UTILITY WORK.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT OR MY RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER FINAL COMMENTS YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AT THIS POINT IN TIME? YES.
MA'AM UNDER DEMOLITION 6.4 IN THE PARAGRAPH.
THE SECOND PARAGRAPH, IT SAYS DEMOLITION CANNOT BE DENIED FOR A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE REQUIRES A TWO-PART COA WHERE THE DEMOLITION IS FIRST CONSIDERED.
AND THEN IF ALLOWED, FOLLOWED BY CONSIDERATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AND SO IN THIS CASE, WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT NEEDS TO PART A, THERE'S NOT A TWO PART TO IT IF ONLY A DEMOLITION AND THEN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT AS WHEN YOU SAY THAT THE APPROVED, UH, STRUCTURE HAS TO BE, IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BEFORE DEMOLITION BEGINS.
I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT'S WHAT YOUR GUIDELINES STATE.
YES, IT IS WHERE OUR GUIDELINES STATE, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DEMOLISH YOUR HOUSE, THEN YOU ALSO HAVE TO SHOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IN ITS PLACE.
IT'S JUST AS FAR AS GROUND OF OUR DEMO, DEMOLITION GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE FOR OUR COUNTRY.
BUT THIS PARAGRAPH CLEARLY LAYS OUT THAT FOR A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S A BIG DEAL, BUT I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE ARE HERE TONIGHT TO DO.
UM, AND WE'VE NOT TALKED ABOUT IT IN THE THREE TIMES THAT WE'VE BEEN TO DESIGN REVIEW, SO THANK YOU.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK AT THIS POINT IN TIME? CAN I SEE THEM RENTER? SORRY, GO AHEAD.
SO DO WE NEED TO FIRST GO THROUGH THE DEMOLITION QUESTIONS? WELL, I KNOW WHAT YOUR STAFF HAS SAID.
DO WE NEED TO DO THIS IN A PARTICULAR ORDER TO GO THROUGH THAT FIRST OF THE DEMOLITION PART AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT? I WOULD THINK SO,
[01:30:01]
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN UNTIL IF YOU DON'T HAVE, RIGHT.SO THIS IS A DELIBERATION, NUMBER ONE OVER THE DEMOLITION.
SO LET US START THERE WITH THE THREE CONSIDERATIONS AND WE MADE IT.
THERE'S NOT THREE THERE'S THIS ISN'T A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
NO, NO, WAIT, I'M GOING TO STEP IN THE STATEMENT IN THE GUIDELINES DOES NOT STIPULATE THAT THIS IS RESTRICTED TO CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
IT JUST SAYS ANY DEMOLITION COA QUOTE IN RENDERING, A DECISION ON A DEMOLITION COA AND THE HPC SHOULD ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING THREE CONSIDERATIONS.
YOU CAN STILL DECIDE THAT IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE IN THIS CASE AND WAVE WHATEVER YOU WANT.
BUT HOW HAS 6.4 0.1 SAYS DEMOLITION OF A NON-ATTORNEY SCHAEFFER SHALL NOT BE DENIED? THAT DOESN'T MATTER.
YOU CAN STILL ASK THESE QUESTIONS AND CONSIDER THE QUESTIONS, BUT THEN END UP NOT DENYING IT.
I MEAN, IT'S, BUT THIS IS PART OF, OF THE PROCEDURE TO DEMOLISH A HOUSE, RIGHT? WHETHER IT'S CONTRIBUTING OR NOT.
SO WE'VE GOT CONSIDERATION ONE, TWO, AND THREE.
SO CONSIDERATION ONE, ADDRESS THEIR STORABLE CULTURAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO IS IT A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WE'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT IT'S NOT.
IS IT SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE OF HISTORIC USE AN EVENT, A PERSON, A BUILDER OR ARCHITECT? DO WE HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THAT? IF IT WAS SIGNIFICANT, IT'D BE A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
IT JUST DEPENDS WHY IT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT, THEN IT WOULD BE A CONTRIBUTING, STRUCK.
SO MY, MY QUESTION WAS, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY, ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THE HISTORIC USE, AN EVENT OR PERSON, A BUILDER OR AN ARCHITECT THAT WE COULD, WE COULD USE FOR THAT QUESTION? SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THAT.
IS IT THE LAST OR THE OLDEST EXAMPLE OF A CERTAIN BUILDING TYPE? NO.
SO WE HAVE, IT'S NOT THE OLDEST OR NOT THE LAST CONSIDERATION TO ADDRESS THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE.
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS OF THE FOUNDATIONS? FLOORS, WALLS, WINDOWS, DOORS, AND ROOFS.
WHO, WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? YES.
UM, SARAH, IN YOUR PICTURES THAT YOU SHOWED UP, YOU ACTUALLY SHOWED A DRAWING WITH A SECOND WINDOW.
YOU CHANGED THE STORY OF THE WINDOW UP OVER THE GARAGE RIGHT NOW, WHICH, WHICH IS CORRECT.
WE'RE ALL IN THE HOUSE THAT THAT'S THERE.
OH, WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THE HOUSE.
I CAN, I CAN SAY TO, TO THIS PART THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW THAT NO, JUST TOTAL.
WE NEED TO STICK TO WHERE WE ARE.
THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
UH, THAT I'VE USED THE PROPERTY AND THE SECOND FLOOR IS UNINHABITABLE.
I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THAT INFORMATION.
CAUSE WE HAD NEVER SPOKEN ABOUT DOING THIS PORTION OF THE, UM, THE GUIDELINE BEFORE.
BUT, UM, I COULD HAVE BROUGHT YOU PHOTOS OF HOLES IN THE FLOOR, THE FEELING FALLING DOWN THE CARPET, COVERING UP MAJOR HOLES IN THE FLOOR.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE NEEDED THAT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THIS? DID YOU GO DOWN THERE AND LOOK AT THEM? I LOOKED AT THE HOUSE.
DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD FROM THE OUTSIDE PERSPECTIVE? UM, NO.
MY ASSUMPTION WAS SINCE IT WAS A NON-CONTRIBUTING IT DIDN'T MATTER WHAT KIND OF INTEGRITY AND ALSO THAT I'M SURE THE ONLY EVIDENCE THAT YOU CAN CONSIDER TONIGHT IS THIS WARRANT EVIDENCE CONTAINED IN TONIGHT'S HEARING.
IS IT AS A HAZARD HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE? SO IT'S NOT FALLING DOWN ON ANYBODY.
IT DOESN'T HAVE PIECES THAT ARE FALLING ON TO OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY.
WE'VE HAD THAT BEFORE WE HAVE THAT ON HOUSE UP THAT WAY.
UM, SO IT'S NOT, SO IT'S NOT A SAFETY ISSUE, NOT A WELFARE ISSUE.
SO CONSIDERATION THREE ADDRESS ATTEMPTED PRESERVATION EFFORTS HAVE OPTIONS FOR REHABILITATION BEEN EXPLORED WITH PRESERVATION ORGANIZATIONS.
I'VE NOT HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
YOU ALL HAVEN'T CONTACTED THE PRESERVATION ORGANIZATION HERE IN
[01:35:06]
NO MA'AM WE HAVE NOT LOOK UP.DOES THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION? OKAY.
AS AQUA ACT APPLICANT BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN SEEKING ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION.
SOMEBODY SAYING YES, APPARENTLY WELL, BUT THIS IS ALL ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION.
NOT WANT TO TEAR DOWN AND BUILD NEW.
THE WAY THAT I READ THE APPLICATION IN THE VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH WAS A REVIEW OF THE RATIONALE FOR THE DEMOLITION.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REVIEWING TONIGHT.
SO THE, SO THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION IS NO, THAT'S NOT RIGHT.
THAT'S THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.
SO YOU HAVE NOT HAVE ALTERNATIVES FOR STRUCTURE RELOCATION OR SELL THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN PURSUED.
AND SO THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO.
SO THEN WE HAVE THE STATEMENT OF REASON AND CAN YOU GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT FARTHER? OKAY.
THERE'S A STATEMENT OF REASONS.
AND THEN HERE'S THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS, WHICH IS TO APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE DEMOLITION OF A NONCONSTRUCTIVE INSTRUCTOR.
HOWEVER, DEMOLITION NAMED BAY NOT PROCEED UNTIL THE DESIGN, THE REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE IS APPROVED BY THE HBC AND A COA ISSUED FOR THE REPLACEMENT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT? THE ONLY ISSUE I HAVE IS I'M THINKING OF THE BUILDING IN THE EAST FRONT STREET, THE CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING.
AND WE COULDN'T TEAR IT DOWN BECAUSE IT WAS THERE A LONG TIME
SO IT WAS CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HOUSE DOWN HERE.
BUT LEFT GOING OUT ON EAST BROAD STREET ACROSS FROM QUEENS POINT.
SO CAN WE GO TO DEMOLITION THE DEMOLITION? TWO-PART CAN YOU SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT? WHY DON'T WE DO A MOTION TO FILL OUT A DEMOLITION AND THEN, THEN WE COULD DO THE NEW HOUSE? WELL, NO, WE HAVE TO APPROVE THE NEW HOUSE BEFORE WE CAN APPROVE WHERE THE DEMOLITION IS.
SO YOU JUST DON'T ISSUE THE COA FOR THE DEMOLITION UNTIL YOU HAVE APPROVED THE, UM, REPLACEMENT, AND THEN YOU ISSUE THE COA THEN TOO.
SO WE, SO WE CAN MAKE A MOTION FOR THE DEMOLITION, RIGHT? WE'RE JUST GOING THROUGH THE EXERCISES THAT WOULD NORMALLY OCCUR IN ALL DEMOLITION CASES.
I DO UNDERSTAND THAT I'M EXPLAINING IT TO OTHERS.
WHY, WHY IN THE WORLD IS GOING THIS WAY? I UNDERSTAND.
SO WE'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT.
AND THEN WE'LL GO TO LOOKING AT THE NEW INFILL HOUSE.
THAT'LL BE OUR NEXT, OUR NEXT PARTY.
SO DOES SOMEONE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? CAN WE HAVE A CONVERSATION? WE HAVEN'T HAD THE QUESTIONS AMONGST US.
SO TO MAKE SURE FOR YOU ALL THANK YOU FOR GOING AND REACHING OUT TO THE ADJACENT PARKING MANNERS.
AND MAYBE THIS IS EVEN A QUESTION ON THE INFILL SIDE, BUT THEY, THEY KNOW THIS HOUSE IS COMING DOWN AND THEY KNOW WHAT YOU'RE BUILDING.
I'M JUST TO HAVE TO SAY, I I'VE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD.
IS THERE IS THIS GENTLEMAN SWARM GUY YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE, DID YOU GET SWORN IN EARLIER? I DID.
AND I DO REALIZE I'M UNDER OATH.
I'M THE ONE WHO COLLECTED THE SIGNATURES.
MY OPINION OF WHAT WAS TOLD TO ME, UNIVERSALLY ON EVERYONE ON HARRINGTON STREET, RIGHT? EVERYONE WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF OUR PROPERTY, THEY WERE VERY HAPPY TO HAVE THIS STRUCTURE REMOVED.
AND THEY ALL, BASICALLY THEIR SIGNATURES WENT ON THIS, WHICH IS AS STRAIGHTFORWARD AS YOU CAN GET.
AND THEN ACTUALLY GENERATED A BIT OF EXCITEMENT.
AND SEVERAL OF THEM ASKED FOR THE FULL PACKET, WHICH WASN'T COMPLETE AT THE TIME WITH T'S LAST RENDERINGS.
[01:40:01]
SEVERAL GREAT.WE'D LIKE TO DO THE FOLLOWING AGAIN.
HUNTER HAVE VERY POSITIVE RESPONSE.
I MEAN, THIS IS JUST BASED ON EXPERIENCE AND YOUR OWN BENEFIT TO THAT, THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS AND UNDERSTANDS.
YOU MAY NOT MAKE THE TIME TO COME TO A MEETING, BUT YOUR OWN FOR YOUR OWN BENEFIT AND MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT I COULD NOT AGREE MORE.
WE MOVED HERE TO MAKE FRIENDS PERFECT.
AND BY THE WAY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN LOST IN THIS.
YEAH, IT WOULD BE FINANCIALLY EASIER FOR ME TO RENOVATE.
IF THERE WAS SOMETHING I COULD RENOVATE AND I'M PRETTY CLEVER ON THAT, BUT I CAN'T COME UP WITH IT.
PEGGY, WE'RE ONLY GOING TO BE TAKING ONE TREE DOWN IN ORDER TO SAVE FIVE OTHER SUBSTANTIAL TREES, WHICH ARE SUBSTANTIAL IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE ONE WE'RE TAKING DOWN, I'VE BEEN TOLD BY AN ART VERSUS I'M GOING TO MAKE IT ANYWAY.
WE'RE GOING TO LOSE A TREE, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US.
IT HAS TO DO WITH THE CITY UTILITIES, BUT THAT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH, WITH WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AGAIN, THE SETTING IS WHAT IS LOST IN THESE RENDERINGS.
IF YOU'RE ACTUALLY RIGHT IN THE BACKYARD, IT'S GORGEOUS.
SO YOU GAVE US THE LETTERS FROM YOUR NEIGHBORS AND YOU HAVE THOSE, CAN YOU, CAN YOU LET US HAVE A LOOK AT THAT? I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WE HAVEN'T LOOKED, WE HAVEN'T SEEN THOSE SO THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN US.
SO THESE ARE FROM SIX 12, EACH FRONT, THE STREETS 6 21 STREET, 6, 8, 11 EAST 12TH STREET, SIX 16 EAST FIRST STREET, SIX 30 EACH FRONT STREET.
THIS IS FROM 600 EDGE OF JUN DRIVE, WHICH IS THE STREET THAT THE HOUSE IS ON.
THIS IS FROM 6 0 6 EDGE REGION.
AND EACH OF THESE DOCUMENTS HAS A STATEMENT THAT SAYS WHO WE PLAN TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AT 1 0 1 KING STREET AND REPLACE IT WITH A NEW INFILL HOUSE.
AND EACH ONE OF THESE SIGNATURES.
THEN THERE'S A STATEMENT THAT SAYS SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSAL.
AND THAT IS WHERE EACH OF THESE PERSONS THAT I HAVE IDENTIFIED HAVE SIGNED UNDER THAT SUPPORT WITH THE PROPOSAL.
NOW, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS, THAT NEEDS ANY DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT IN TIME? ANYBODY ELSE GOT ANYTHING? OKAY.
SO WOULD THEN SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? UH, WE LOOKED AT THE DEMOLITION PART, UH, WHEN SOMEBODY LIKED A MOTION MAY MAKE A MOTION FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THIS HOUSE.
I MOVED TO FIND THE APPLICATION FOR ONE-ON-ONE COACHING.
ONE-ON-ONE CAME STRAIGHT TO BE NOT WITH NEWBURN NEWBORNS CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTIONS, 15.411 DASH 15.4 TO NINE AND NUMEROUS HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDE BY THE SPACE ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS OF FACT, BUT SIX POINT DEMOLITION, 6.4 0.1 DEMOLITION OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE SHALL NOT BE NOT BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
SIX POINT, UH, 0.4 0.3, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESERVES THE RIGHT TO POSTPONE DILEMMA DEMOLITION UNTIL DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING PERMITS ARE APPROVED FOR REDEVELOPMENT PLANS, UM, THAT ALL ANY, OKAY.
SO FIVES BACK TO PROJECT, UH, IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW HOUSE FOR THE PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, THE DESIGN OF WHICH WILL NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRUENCE WITH HISTORIC DISTRICT GOVERNANCE.
[01:45:02]
YOU HAVE A SECOND.THE MOTION PASSES FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE HOUSE.
SO NOW LET US GO TO PART TWO OF THE DEMOLITION.
JUST GIVE HIM A MINUTE TO GO OVER THIS.
WELL, IT'S UP TO YOU TO DISCUSS.
SO COULD YOU GO UP TO THE TOP? SO DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT YOU WANT TO CHANGE FROM WHAT'S WRITTEN HERE, IF YOU WANT TO FOLLOW THE NORMAL PROCESS AS FROM PUBLIC INPUT ON THAT STUFF.
AND THEN, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSION.
WE'VE HAD THE DISCUSSION ALREADY.
I DID ASK IF THEY WERE OPPONENTS PROPONENTS, I'VE ASKED ALL THAT AND NOBODY ELSE IS THERE ANYBODY OUT IN THE AUDIENCE THAT'S IN ANY OF THOSE GROUPS? OKAY.
I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION AT THE DESIGN REVIEW.
IT APPEARED TO ME THAT THE SA THE SAME PICTURE THAT WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU HOLD ON A MINUTE FOR THE, CAN YOU HOLD ON TO THAT QUESTION SO WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS OR WHY I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING, THEN MAKE SURE IF ANYBODY ELSE, THIS IS FOR THE NEW ONES.
THIS IS STUFF FOR THE NEW INFILL HOUSE, DELIBERATE ON THE INFILL IS TRYING TO THROUGH IN ORDER OF WHAT, UM, IS WRITTEN IN, IN SPECIFICALLY IN THAT I KNOW YOU HAVE, I KNOW A COUPLE OF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM, BUT I'M GOING TO GO IN ORDER OF, AND WE'RE GOING TO GET THERE.
SO I SAID, HOLD ON TO YOUR QUESTION.
BECAUSE THIS, THIS, UH, LET ME SAY AGAIN, UH, AS MAN SAID, THIS IS THE ORDER OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO FOR OUR DEMOLITION OF A PROPERTY.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT.
SO WHAT, WHAT IS ON GUIDING US THROUGH IT? ALRIGHT.
SO FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION THAT YOU WANT TO, ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WANTS TO MAKE ABOUT THAT? I THINK I'LL ONLY TO CONFIRM THAT WE'VE GOT A STRUCTURE IN THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND IT APPEARS TO BE SITUATED AS SIMILAR STRUCTURE.
SO, UH, ON THE RIVER AND ALONG EDGERTON.
DO YOU IDENTIFY THAT AT THE END OF YOUR CONCLUSIONS? CAUSE I CAN'T SEE THE END OF YOUR CONCLUSIONS.
DID YOU IDENTIFY AS BEING IN THAT PATTERN? OH, YES.
UTILITIES, ANYBODY, ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? OKAY.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY, ANYTHING ABOUT THAT QUESTION? IS THIS THE TIME WHEN YOU WANT US TO ASK QUESTIONS? YOU, YOU HAVE TO TELL ME, SAY THAT AGAIN.
WHEN IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR US TO ASK QUESTIONS? IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION YOU COULD ASK IT.
NOW I THINK ABOUT DESIGN, ABOUT DESIGN.
THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING THROUGH THIS ITEM BY ITEM BY ITEM.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO FIRST? ALL RIGHT.
SO NOW YOU CAN, NOW YOU CAN ASK YOUR QUESTION AS WE GO THROUGH THIS.
UM, THE PICTURE YOU SHOWED A DESIGN REVIEW LOOKS THE SAME AS THE PICTURE THAT'S IN THERE TONIGHT.
AND THERE WERE SOME SUGGESTIONS MADE THERE.
I REMEMBER THAT WOULD HAVE MADE THE STRUCTURE PICK UP SOME OF THE SIMILARITIES IN ARCHITECTURE FROM THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS.
I DON'T SEE ANY OF THOSE SUGGESTIONS WERE USED.
SO WHAT, WHAT WE DID DO, WE WENT BACK AND DISCUSSED IT.
AND YOU KNOW, MY JOB AS ARCHITECT IS TO TRY AND TAKE THE WISHES AND DESIRES OF THE OWNER AND, YOU KNOW, PUT THEM TOGETHER WITH THE GUIDELINES AND COME UP WITH A PRODUCT.
AND, OH, WHAT HAPPENED? UM, WHAT WE DID DO WAS IN ORDER TO MAKE A GESTURE FOR MORE SHADOW LINES, WE'VE TAKEN A SERIES OF INSET, BRICK AND STUCCO ON THE STRUCTURE TO START TO CREATE MORE A, A SHADOW LINE DEFINITION, OUTLINE, YOU KNOW, COLUMNED, UH, LOOK, INSTEAD OF PLACING AN ACTUAL COLUMN IN THAT CORNER, WHICH WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT, UM,
[01:50:01]
WE FELT THE MODERN STRUCTURE REALLY, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT BEING OF ITS TIME, UM, PUTTING THE COLUMN ON THAT CORNER WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY FELT, UH, WAS APPROPRIATE.AND SO THAT'S WHY THE, WE ADDED THE SHADOW MINES, UM, AND POINT OUT WHERE YOU DID THAT.
IF YOU CAN SEE AROUND THE GARAGE AND MAYBE MCAS SHOW IT BECAUSE YEAH, IT'S INSET IN THE, IN THE BRICK PATTERN ON BOTH SIDES AND IN THE STUCCO UP ABOVE, SO THAT, YOU KNOW, NEXT TO THE ENTRY, YOU GET A RELIEF OF A, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CALLING IT LIKE A MODERN COLUMN.
IT'S NOT A REAL COLUMN, BUT IT'S JUST THE BEGINNINGS OF HERE IS HERE IS A NOD TOWARDS SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE BEEN A COLUMN, BUT IN THE MODERN STRUCTURE, KEEPING IT AS MINIMAL AS POSSIBLE.
SO, WELL, MY, MY SPECIFIC, UM, SUGGESTION AS IT WERE, WAS TO, UH, DO SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT EASE, BUT TO GIVE THEM SOME OF THE APPEARANCE OF EASE, WHICH ALL OF THOSE BUILDINGS YOU HAD AS EXAMPLES, HAT WAS THAT DISCUSSED AND REJECTED.
AND WHAT WE DID DO WAS, YOU KNOW, WE TOOK THAT SAME BRICK DETAIL THAT IS ABOVE THE DOORS AND WINDOWS AND REMOVE THE METAL FROM ABOVE ANY OF THE BRICK SO THAT THE BRICK STRUCTURE ITSELF WILL BE ENTIRELY SHOWN AS A BRICK STRUCTURE.
AND THAT, THAT, UM, THAT EDGE DETAIL AT THE ROOF HAS A KIND OF A TWO-PART BRICK RELIEF TO IT.
SO THAT IT GIVES IT JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A SHADOW LINE UP THERE THAN AN ACTUAL CAUSE WE'VE GOT A, THAT'S A PARAPET WALL AND TO PUT IT AN EVE ON A PARAPET WALL LIKE THAT IS, I MEAN, IT'S NOT SOMETHING I'VE EVER DONE OR SEEN, YOU KNOW, I, I, I UNDERSTAND THE IDEA THAT, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE UP THE FLAT ROOF, LIKE THE ONE THAT'S THAT'S TALL, BUT IN THIS CASE, THOSE ARE PARAPETS.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A, IT'S THE EDGE OF A BALCONY.
SO, UM, THIS IS WHERE YOU ENDED UP, IT APPEARS TO BE SOMEONE CORE BOLT.
YOU CAN SEE THE SHADOW LINES ON THIS LEFT SIDE HERE, RIGHT? COULD THOSE BE BEEFED UP? SARAH COULD.
I MEAN, SO THAT THE SHADOW LINE IS, OR, OR MAKE IT EVEN DO DOUBLED, YOU KNOW, I HONESTLY, I, I DREW OUT, UM, I HAD A DETAILED FROM, UH, ANOTHER ACTUALLY FROM, UM, TOWNHOUSES ON THE, ON THE CORNER.
I LOOKED AT WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE HAD DONE DOWN THERE AND DOWN THERE, THERE WAS KIND OF A, FOUR-PART A BRICK, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ACTUALLY TOOK THAT AND PUT IT ON HERE AND JUST, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE.
I MEAN, THIS, THIS STRUCTURE, BIASED DESIGN IS LINEAR AND, YOU KNOW, AND BY THE WISHES OF THE OWNER IS VERY LINEAR.
AND YOU KNOW, WHAT WE TRIED TO DO WAS SHOW THAT IN A MINIMAL WAY.
UM, BUT, BUT I PUT THAT, THAT HEAVY BRICK, DOUBLE ROADBLOCK WITH ANOTHER, UM, I, I DID A SOLDIER IN A ROADBLOCK OR TWO ROADBLOCKS BENEATH I THINK IS WHAT THE TOWNHOUSES HAVE.
AND IT'S JUST NOT APPROPRIATE.
IT LOOKS LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT, UH, NOT FAIR.
ARE YOU, ARE YOU DONE WITH YOUR QUESTIONS? I DON'T WANT TO STEP IN.
SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ENTRANCE.
AND MAYBE THE, UM, THE OTHER RENDERING SHOWS IT A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECTLY ON, OR EVEN THE OTHER RENDERINGS, I THINK MAY.
THE, THE IDEA WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A ZERO ENTRY SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY DIDN'T WANT THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR WHEELCHAIR ACCESS, THEY WANTED ZERO ENTRY SIDEWALK RIGHT UP TO THE FRONT DOOR LEADS INTO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING RIGHT THERE, SO THAT YOU'VE GOT A LIGHT AND A DOOR AND, YOU KNOW, PLANTER THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, FROM ANY ONE WALKING DOWN THE STREET WOULD, YOU KNOW, IN MY MIND, SEE THE DOOR, SEE THE LIGHTS, SEE THAT THAT'S GOT A SIDEWALK LEADING RIGHT UP TO IT.
SO BETWEEN THE ONES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ON SCREEN, AND THEN THE RENDERINGS, THE ONSCREEN HAS A MORE DEFINED LOOK, IS THAT THE RENDERING THAT DOES THAT? OR IS THIS A WASHOUT IT'S?
[01:55:01]
AND THAT'S WHERE WE DID THE ACTUAL, WHAT YOU ARE APPROVING, YOU KNOW, IS THE, THE LINE DRAWINGS FROM MY, YOU KNOW, UH, FROM THE DRAWING SET RENDERINGS, AS YOU KNOW, OUR IMPRESSIONS OF WHAT THE BUILDING IS, YOU KNOW, THAT LINE WEIGHT DOES SHOW UP AS DARKER.THE REALITY IS DO BRICKS SHOW AN OUTLINE OF THAT INTENSITY, NOT NECESSARILY.
AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO DO, UH, THE PHOTO REALISTIC RENDERING WAS NOT DONE BY ME, BUT BY ANOTHER GROUP.
BUT TO TRY AND GIVE YOU A BLEND OF HERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT VIEWS OF THAT PROPERTY ON THE FRONT.
THERE'S A LINE DRAWING AND THERE'S TWO RENDERINGS.
ONE I DID ONE ANOTHER GROUP DID.
AND YOU CAN, FROM THOSE, UM, KIND OF GATHER TO ME WHAT THE BUILDING WILL APPEAR TO BE, UM, YOU KNOW, SHADOW LINES AT A PARTICULAR PART OF DAY WE'LL SHOW MORE OR LESS, YOU KNOW, I, I PUT A ONE INCH IN, UH, INSET BRICK AND STUCCO AND, AND THE, AND THE BRICK.
COULD IT BE MORE, YEAH, IT COULD BE MORE, UM, IS IT GONNA MAKE IT THAT DIFFERENT? NOT, I MEAN, TO ME, NOT NECESSARILY, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT I'M APPROVING.
THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING THAT QUESTION.
I WANTED TO KNOW IF THE DESIGN THAT WE'RE SEEING ON A SCREEN IS REALLY WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, OR IS THIS JUST PICTURE BLOWN OUT BY THE LIGHTING? AND SO I'M NOT SEEING THE DEFINITION OR IS THAT NOT REALISTIC? SO I THINK THAT PICTURE IS A LITTLE WASHED OUT THE REALITY.
UM, AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, UH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YES, EXACTLY.
YOU KNOW, TO ME, IS THAT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE? YES.
IF THE OTHER RENDERING WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
THAT'S ALSO WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT THREE DIFFERENT, UM, THINGS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
UM, SO ACTUALLY THE ONE ON THE SCREEN AT THE MOMENT IS THE SAME ONE THAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THE TOP ROOF IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
IT DOESN'T OVERHANG AS MUCH AS THAT ONE.
UM, THIS IS THE ONE, THE PAPER ONE IS THE ONE THAT YOU, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW.
AND WHAT'S, WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN IS DIFFERENT.
NO, THESE ARE THE SAME RIGHT NOW.
THERE IS ANOTHER RENDERING THAT WHEN WE WERE TALKING EARLIER, I WAS REFERRING TO, UM, DRAWING.
IT MIGHT'VE BEEN THAT ONE, BUT, UM, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A WHITE STUCCO WITH A GRAY, UM, BRICK.
AND ON WHAT I'M ASKING, IS IT JUST BECAUSE THAT'S THE RENDERING OR IS IT GOING TO BE COLOR CHANGES ALL THE SAME, BUT THE OWNER'S INTENT IS TO DO A LIGHT COLORED, STUCCO AND BRICK.
THAT HAS NOT BEEN 100% CHOSEN, BUT THAT'S THE, IT'S NOT TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S RED BRICK OR, YOU KNOW, THE INTENT IS TO DO LIKE COLORED STUCCO AND BRICK.
THE BACK PART, THAT'S KIND OF THE COLLEGE, ALL THE SAME.
THAT'S STUCK UP IN THE FRONT IS BRICK.
SARAH, TWO OF THE THINGS THAT YOU SHOWED EARLIER THAT WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WAS THE FRONT DOOR, WHICH YOU HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING TO IT, EXCEPT FOR THE POTTED PLANT THERE.
AND THEN THE SECOND ONE WAS TO BALANCE THAT WINDOW ON THE SECOND FLOOR, OVER THE GARAGE, YOU SHOWED ONE PICTURE THAT HAD A, AN IDENTICAL WINDOW NEXT TO IT.
DID YOU THROW THAT OUT? WHAT WE DID WAS WE TOOK THE SAME WINDOW.
THAT'S ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE.
AND WELL, ACTUALLY ALL THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT NOW ARE THE SAME SIZE.
SO THE TWO ABOVE THE GARAGE, AND THEN THE ONE ON THE, THE RECTANGLE ON THE RIGHT.
AND THEN THE ONE SETBACK ON THE STUCCO.
THOSE ARE ALL THE SAME SIZE WINDOW.
AND SO WE TRIED TO LIKE BALANCE THAT OUT SO THAT THERE WASN'T, I KNOW IT WAS A LITTLE CONFUSING HAVING A DIFFERENT SIZE WINDOW ALTOGETHER, UM, ON THAT ONE FIVE, WELL, HAVING A SECOND WINDOW, DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT THIS DIFFERENT SIZE? OR CAN IT NOT BE THE SAME SIZE? IT WOULD STILL HAVE SOME BALANCE.
IF THE THINGS THIS, THIS WINDOW WAS SMALLER BEFORE AND NOW THEY'VE MADE THESE ALL THE SAME IS SAYING, THERE'S STILL THAT BLANK WALL, WHICH I HAVE A WINDOW, YOU KNOW? AND THAT, I MEAN, THE REALITY IS TOO, THAT THAT WALL IS SET MUCH FARTHER BACK AND IT'S, IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, TO ME, IT'S NOT EXPERIENCED FULL ON EVER.
THIS IS AS IF YOU'RE LIKE 15 FEET UP IN THE AIR LOOKING AT YEAH.
WHEN YOU'RE WALKING ON THE BUY, YOU
[02:00:01]
MAY NEVER, WHEN YOU WALK BY THAT HOUSE OR RIDE BY IN A CAR, YOU PROBABLY WILL NEVER SEE THAT WINDOW.I MEAN, IT JUST, IT'S SO FAR UP.
SO YOU HAVE ELIMINATED THE IDEA OF PUTTING A SECOND WINDOW ON THAT SECOND FLOOR OVER THE GARAGE.
WHAT WE DID WAS TO EVEN IT OUT SO THAT ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE AND THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE WOOD STRUCTURE IN THE MIDDLE, THERE ARE, THERE'S A WINDOW TO MAKE THAT SYMMETRICAL ON EITHER SIDE OF THE WOOD.
THERE'S A WINDOW UP TOP, A WINDOW UP TOP, AND YOU HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF ANYTHING FOR THE FRONT DOOR TO MAKE IT LOOK MORE LIKE A FRONT DOOR.
AND YOU CAN FORGET THE IDEA OF THE WHEELCHAIR BECAUSE YOU GOT THREE BLOOD, TWO FLIGHTS OF STAIRS IN THERE.
WELL, THEY HAVE AN ELEVATOR, SO GOOD.
UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THAT STRUCTURE, WHEN YOU WALK BY, IT, LET'S JUST SAY AT NIGHT AND YOU'VE GOT A LIT FRONT DOOR, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S MEANT TO BE WOOD.
IT'S MEANT TO, TO READ AS, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST, UH, A FRONT DOOR IN A, IN A WOOD SIDING.
SO IF YOU CAN COME UP AND SPEAK TO THE FIVE TO FIVE PHONE, CAUSE I CAN'T HEAR, I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS PEGGY'S CONCERN BECAUSE IT'S MINE.
I SPENT ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS IN A WHEELCHAIR.
THIS IS COMPLETELY ACCESSIBLE.
ONCE YOU'VE DONE THAT EXPERIENCE, YOU DESIGNED THAT WAY FROM THAT POINT ON THAT'S THE REASON THERE AREN'T STEPS UP TO GET TO THAT FRONT DOOR.
UM, THAT'S THE REASON THAT YOU CAN GO INTO THE FOYER AND GO DIRECTLY INTO AN ELEVATOR WITHOUT ANY, UH, ELEVATION CHANGE.
AND THAT'S ACTUALLY CARRIED THROUGHOUT THE PLAN AT THAT'S.
IT'S STARTED HERE AT THE FRONT DOOR.
AND AS A RETIRED PHYSICAL THERAPIST, I'M GLAD TO HEAR YOU HAVE AN ELEVATOR.
UM, AS SOMEONE WHO NEEDED ONE AND DIDN'T PAMPLIN.
DOES, DOES ANYBODY, ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS AT THIS POINT? OKAY.
SO SOME OF WHAT WE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT IN DESIGN REVIEW, YOU'VE ADDRESSED, BUT YOU'VE NOT ADDRESSED THE FRONT DOOR WITH ANY CHANGES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, NOR THOSE TWO WINDOWS OVER THE GARAGE.
YOU'D STILL DECIDED NOT TO PUT A SECOND WINDOW OVER THE GARAGE.
NO, THERE, THERE ARE TWO WINDOWS OVER THE GARAGE.
THEY'RE NOT ON THE THIRD FLOOR WINDOWS.
BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT WHERE THERE'S ONLY ONE WINDOW.
SO WE BALANCED IT OUT FROM THE RIGHT TO THE LEFT HAND SIDE, AROUND THE MIDDLE WOODS STRUCTURE INSTEAD.
BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT.
AND ON WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN DESIGNING, WE SUGGESTED DIFFERENT WINDOWS.
SHE'S MADE IT A BIGGER WINDOW.
WE MIGHT FEEL, WE DIDN'T FEEL WHAT WAS SUGGESTED WAS APPROPRIATE.
AND I'M JUST POINTING OUT THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE MADE SOME SUGGESTIONS, WHICH YOU DID NOT DO.
AND THERE WERE SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT ADDRESSED THE FRONT DOOR THAT YOU'VE NOT DONE ANYTHING ABOUT.
SO ANY OTHER, OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT THAT JUST IS NOT TRUE.
WE DEFINITELY PAID ATTENTION TO THE FRONT DOOR AND THE FRONT DOOR ENTRANCE.
AND WE DEFINITELY WANT SOMEONE FROM THE STREET TO KNOW THAT'S THE WAY YOU GET IN THE HOUSE.
AND WE HAVE A SIDEWALK GOING TO IT THAT HAS NO STEPS.
WE HAVE A DOOR THAT WAS 48 INCHES WIDE.
IT'S A, IT'S A FOYER THAT YOU STEP UNDER.
NO ONE IS GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME RECOGNIZING HOW TO GET INTO THAT HOUSE.
NOW WE'VE SACRIFICED THAT WHOLE FIRST FLOOR BECAUSE WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO GO UNDER WATER SOMETIMES.
BUT THAT'S, BUT THAT WAS THE CONCLUSION.
WE ALSO TOOK VERY SERIOUSLY THE WINDOW.
AND FRANKLY, IT WAS YOUR SUGGESTION THAT WE MAKE THEM SYMMETRICAL.
AND WHEN WE DID IT BETTER, RIGHT.
UH, KIND OF ALSO WE DID A FOUNDATION LINE, WHICH PROBABLY I'D LIKE TO RUN ALL THE WAY AROUND THE HOUSE.
UM, JUST SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE FOUNDATION WE TOOK AND WE PUT COLUMNS ON IT, THE COLUMNS, FRANKLY, JUST DIDN'T WHAT, AND IT'S PERSONAL OPINION, BUT THEY DIDN'T WORK.
BUT NO, WE TOOK, WE LISTENED VERY HARD TO WHAT PEOPLE SAID.
I THINK WE TRIED THEM ALL NOW.
WE OUT OF PERSONAL TASTES, CHOSE WHICH ONES TO BRING TO YOU.
BUT I'D SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUGGESTIONS.
BUT YET TONIGHT PEOPLE ARE STILL ADDRESSED YOUR FRONT DOOR.
THAT'S THE POINT THAT I'M MAKING.
[02:05:01]
ALL RIGHT.BUT NO, I THINK YOU'LL HAVE NO TROUBLE FINDING, OKAY.
I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I'M JUST ADDRESSING WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE COMMISSION AND WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.
SO DOES UNDER DESIGN PRINCIPLES, ANYBODY ELSE, ANYTHING THEY WANT TO ASK ABOUT? OKAY.
SO THE NEXT ONE IS IN-FIELD CONSTRUCTION.
SO ANYTHING THERE THAT ANYONE WANTS TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT OR ANY COMMENTS ABOUT ANYBODY SAY ANYTHING THEY WANT TO DISCUSS THERE? OKAY.
ANYBODY ISSUES THERE, WALL TRANS AND ORDINATION.
WE TALKED SOME ABOUT THAT ALREADY.
THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION THAT WE JUST HAD.
MASONARY METALS, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THOSE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
AND WHAT PARTS OF THIS HOUSE ARE BUILT WITH, WITH WHAT PARTS WITH WHAT KIND OF MATERIAL WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT? THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS ON THE FOUNDATION.
UM, WHERE ARE THE VIPS AND THE ACCESS DOORS? THEY'RE NOT ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
SO THEY'RE ON THE BACK OF THE BUILDING THAT THERE ARE, UM, THERE ARE FLOOD BENDS ON THE BACK OF THE BUILDING AND ANY, ANY CHANGES LIKE WE'RE WORKING WITH THE ENGINEER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE STRUCTURE IS WITHIN THE BEE ZONE AND ALL OF THAT IS COMPLETE.
AND SO IF THERE WERE ANY CHANGES, WE WOULD BRING THAT BACK.
BUT WHAT YOU SEE ON THE FRONT IS WHAT IS ON THE FRONT.
THERE, THERE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY FLOOD VENTS IN THE MASONRY ON THAT FRONT STRUCTURE.
WE HAVE THEM IN THE GARAGE DOORS AND HAVING THEM JUST IN THE GARAGE DOORS IS GOING TO DO WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE THE REQUIREMENTS.
AND HE'S GOING TO LET THE WORRY IN, BUT IT HAS NOWHERE TO GO OUT IN AND OUT.
SO IT'S GOING TO GO IN AND OUT THOSE GARAGE DOORS.
AND THE VINCENT, THE REAR APPARENTLY, RIGHT? YEAH.
ALRIGHTY, UH, METALS, ANYBODY? ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT METALS PAINT? IF WE GO ON DOWN ANYTHING TO DO WITH PAINT, MATT, CAN YOU GO ON DOWN PAST THAT? OKAY.
DAN, WE HAVE STATEMENTS OF REASON, ANYBODY, ANYTHING THEY WANT TO SAY ABOUT THAT AT THIS POINT? ANYBODY.
SO THERE'S A MOTION IF YOU COULD GO ON DOWN SO WE COULD SEE THE REST OF THE MOTION.
SO ANYBODY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THEY WANT AT THIS POINT IN TIME? I HAVE A QUESTION.
WHAT DO YOU, WHAT DO YOU MEAN EXTERIOR UTILITY WORK? WHAT IS IT THAT YOU SAY YOU JUST NEED TO SEE? AND WE NEED SCREENING IN THIS CASE, A PLATFORM AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF, BUT THAT, THAT CAN BE A SEPARATE, MINOR COA LATER.
ALL OF THAT EQUIPMENT WILL BE ON THAT ROOF AREA.
SO NONE OF IT WILL BE VISIBLE FROM BELOW OR REQUIRE A PLATFORM.
AND, AND IS THAT CLEAR FROM YOUR DRAWING? BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT THAT THERE WAS A MECHANICAL ROOM ON THE THIRD FLOOR, UH, AND, BUT SOME MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT HAS TO BE OUTSIDE.
SO APPARENTLY THAT'S OUT ON THAT DAY ON THAT.
AND ARE YOUR PICTURES SHOW THAT THAT THAT'S WHERE THAT'S GOING TO BE? OR YOU HAVE THAT IN WRITING? SO I HADN'T, I DIDN'T SEE THEM.
UH, NO, IT'S, IT'S NOT WRITTEN OUT ON THE, ON THE PLAN.
SO THAT, THAT IS THE HOMEOWNERS IN 10 AND IT'S LABELED MECHANICAL SPACE.
AND, UH, THAT IS, THAT'S WHAT IT WILL BE USED FOR.
WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT ADDITIONAL CHEMICAL ROOM YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT HERE.
THE PORTION TO THE LEFT IS OUTSIDE, WHICH IS NOT SEEN FROM THE STREET.
BUT DO YOU SHOW WHERE THE MECHANICAL STUFF, DO YOU HAVE ANY PICTURES THAT SHOW WHERE THE MECHANICAL STUFF OUTSIDE IS GOING TO BE? NO, BECAUSE IT WILL NOT BE SEEN.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO KNOW ABOUT, DO WE NOT? YES.
AS I'M HEARING THE APPLICANT, MADAM CHAIR, IT SOUNDS LIKE SHE'S SAYING THAT ALL OF THE HVC COMPONENTS ARE GOING TO BE HOUSED IN THAT ROOM.
OH, I THOUGHT YOU SAID SOMETHING WAS OUTSIDE ON THE,
[02:10:01]
UM, SOME INSIDE SOME OUTSIDE, ANY, ANY AIR INTAKE, UH, UNITS WILL BE OUT HIDDEN BEHIND THAT PARAPET WALL ON, ON THAT DECK AREA, WHICH WILL NOT BE SEEN FROM ANYWHERE, UM, ON THE STREET.IT'S UP TO THIS AREA HERE BEHIND THE, CAN YOU SH CAN YOU SHOW THAT IN ONE OF YOUR DRAWINGS? THAT'S YOUR INTENT? YES.
SHALL WE? SO WE KNOW ABOUT THAT.
BECAUSE IF WE HAVE THAT, THEN IT MAY BE THAT THIS REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE IS, IS NOT THAT WE DON'T NEED THAT.
THAT'S WHERE I'M WALKING THROUGH.
SO YOU DON'T, I'M TRYING TO HELP YOU SO THAT, SO THAT YOU DON'T, THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THIS REQUIREMENT ATTACHED TO YOU.
UM, I'M SURE THEY'LL HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE.
UM, FEMA REQUIRES THAT WITH THE FLOOD INSURANCE, A CERTAIN, HAVE YOU GOT THAT IN THE DRAWING THAT THEY REQUIRE CERTAIN OPENINGS? THAT THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
WE'RE WORKING WITH THE ENGINEER RIGHT NOW TO MAKE SURE ALL OF THAT IS CORRECT.
AND SO IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES FROM WHAT WE HAVE, THAT WILL BE SHOWN, WHAT WE'RE SHOWING ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS AS IS, OKAY, SO YOU HAVE NO OPENINGS ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
AND IF REQUIRED TO HAVE SOME PORTION OF THE WALLS, THAT CAN BE, UM, UH, BREAKAWAY WALLS.
THAT'S THE PART THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE ENGINEER ON.
SO IF SOMETHING IS CHANGED FROM WHAT WE HAVE SHOWN, WE WILL BRING THAT BACK TO YOU.
BUT, UM, WE DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY CHANGES ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
SO I WOULD SAY THERE MIGHT BE A FLOOD OPENING UNDERNEATH THE DECK THAT, THAT WE DO NEED TO SHOW ADDITIONALLY, ON THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, ON THE WATER SIDE, UNDERNEATH THAT DECK, UM, THAT IF, IF THAT KIND OF CHANGE IS GOING TO OCCUR, WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY BRING THAT BACK TO YOU AND SHOW YOU THAT.
SO THEN WE NEED TO MAKE A CONDITION OF THAT, THAT YOU, THAT YOU HAVEN'T DEALT WITH THAT IN THE HOUSE YET THAT YOU'RE WORKING ON, THAT WE CAN ABSOLUTELY BRING THAT BACK UP.
SO WHOEVER WRITES THIS UP, THAT WILL BE A CONDITION.
UH, MATT, CAN SHE JUST BRING THAT BACK TO YOU? OR DOES THAT NEED TO COME TO THE FULL COMMISSION? WELL, IT DEPENDS WHAT THEY ARE, WHAT THE SOLUTIONS ARE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT BREAKAWAY AND BRICK WALLS, BUT THE WOODEN WALLS PROBABLY, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S SUFFICIENT OR WHAT'S REQUIRED.
SO WE'LL NEED, DO WE NEED TO STAY TO THEM THAT, UM, THOSE ISSUES WILL BE BROUGHT BACK TO YOU AND DECIDED WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN DEAL WITH IT AS A MINOR ART NEEDS TO COME TO THE FULL BOOK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S HOW WE'LL NEED TO STATE THAT WHOEVER'S GOING TO MAKE THE PROPOSAL.
SO THAT IS, THAT IS THAT THE ONLY LAST THING THAT WE NEED TO ADD TO THIS, CAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE DRAWING SO THAT WE SEE YOUR STUFF UPSTAIRS.
SO WE CAN DO A WAY WITH THIS ONE REQUIREMENT THAT HE HAS.
AND SO THEN THE ONLY THING THAT'S LEFT IS FOR A RECOMMENDATION FOR YOU TO COME WITH, UH, THE FLOOD INFORMATION AND THE CHAIR, HAS THE APPLICANT MADE AN ORAL AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION, UH, HAD YOU MADE AN ORAL AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION? WE'RE HAPPY TO BRING IT BACK.
SO IS THAT GOOD? IS THAT GOOD AS AN AMENDMENT TO AN APPROVED, TO SEE A WAY, RIGHT.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT ORALLY RIGHT HERE, THE FLOOD WITH THE FLOOD STUFF.
FOR THE SO I BRING THAT BACK, NOT THE HVAC EACH BACK, IF WE CAN ORALLY AMEND IT TO SAVE IT, THAT YOU KNOW, WILL BE ON THE ROOF BEHIND THE PARAPET WALL.
THAT'S WHAT SHE'S ASKING YOU TO SAY.
YOU'RE GOING TO REDO THE DRAWING TO REFLECT THAT SO THAT WE CAN TAKE IT OUT OF HIS, HIS FORM.
I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING IF WE WERE ORALLY AMENDING IT NOW.
SO YEAH, THAT WAS MY QUESTION.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS THE PREROGATIVE TO AMEND THEIR APPLICATION AT ANY TIME.
AND IF SHE'S MAKING AN AMENDMENT HERE AND NOW THAT THE HPAC COMPONENTS WILL BE HOUSED IN THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION, THAT MAY BE SUFFICIENT SUCH THAT THE DRAWINGS DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK.
IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT WE'RE OKAY.
SO THE DRAWINGS, SO THE DRAWINGS DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK.
IF YOU'RE MAKING THAT AS AN AMENDMENT.
AND YOU'RE ALREADY MAKING THAT AS AN AMENDMENT NOW.
[02:15:01]
THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME BACK.WELL, WE DO NEED TO COME BACK IS WHAT YOUR FLOOD PLAN RELATE TO BRING THAT BACK TO MATT.
SO THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE COA WOULD BE AS AMENDED.
WHOEVER'S GOING TO MAKE IT, YOU GOT TO PUT IT, WE KEEP GOING IN TO ADD TO IT AS AMENDED.
SO AS AMENDED AND THE FLOAT THAT'S GOOD.
HAS THE FLOOD LANDS HAD GOT TO COME BACK.
IS THAT EVERYTHING AT THIS POINT? ANYBODY, ANYTHING ELSE THEY WANTED TO ADD OR ANYBODY? OKAY.
I DO THINK IT WOULD BE LOVELY TO FINISH THAT FOUNDATION AROUND.
IF YOU ALL DECIDE YOU WANT TO DO THAT.
SO YOU MAKING THAT AS THAT, BECAUSE WE HAVE A LINE ALL THE WAY AROUND.
IS THAT NOT WHAT YOU MEAN? OR? I THINK HE, WE, HE MENTIONED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO DO IT AROUND THE ENTIRE FOUNDATION.
WE DO HAVE A, UH, KIND OF A ROADBLOCK ON THE BRICK.
AND THEN ON THE STUCCO, WE HAVE THE SAME, THAT RUNS ALL THE WAY AROUND THE FOUNDATION.
THE DRAWINGS SHOW IT ALL THE WAY AROUND, THAT'S IT? YEP.
AND IT WILL CREATE A SHADOW LINE, BUT THEY ALSO WILL HAVE PLANTS THERE.
SO, AND WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT LANDSCAPE WILL ABSOLUTELY COME BACK.
CAUSE THEY, THERE'S NOT LANDSCAPE IN HERE.
NO, THERE'S NO LANDSCAPING IN THERE SO FAR.
YOU'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND LANDSCAPE.
THAT'S OFF THE TABLE FOR TONIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE AT THIS POINT IN TIME? AS I SEE NO FROM ANYBODY.
SO WHO WANTS TO MAKE THE REPUB THE PROPOSAL, UH, FOR THIS, WITH THE, UH, CONSIDERATION THAT THEY HAVE TO COME BACK REGARDING THEIR FLOOD VENT, A STRUCTURE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO THERE'S THIS HAVE TO FIVE.
I MOVED TO FIND THAT THAT APPLICANT AT 1 0 1 KING WELL APPLY FOR A CA COA TO BE NOT IN CONGRESS WITH NUMEROUS CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTIONS, 15.4 11 DASH 15.4 29 AND NEWBORNS HISTORIC GUIDELINES, DISTRICT GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES OF FINDINGS OF FACT.
DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS, 2.1 0.1, 2.1 0.2, 2.1 0.3 UTILITIES, 2.3 0.1, 2.3 0.2 DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 3.1 0.2, THREE AND FOUR IN-FIELD CONSTRUCTION, 3.4 0.12, THREE AND FOUR FOUNDATIONS, 4.1 0.4, 4.1 0.6.
4.2 0.4 ENTRANCES 4.4 0.4 MASONARY 5.1 0.5 METALS 5.3 0.3, 5.3 0.4.
PAINT 5.4 0.2 5.4 0.3 AND FOUR FOR S AND S FACT FINDINGS OF FACT, BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION AND STAFF'S JUDGMENT.
UH, NUMBER ONE, THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
NUMBER TWO, THE PROPOSAL ISN'T INFILL PROJECT, NUMBER THREE, THE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES.
NUMBER FOUR, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATION AND CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIALS HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND TOM BENNETT ACCORDINGLY.
AND NUMBER FIVE, THE PROJECT IS NOT INCOME WITH THE GUIDELINES AND THE CONDITION OF THE, OF THIS APPLICATION WOULD BE AS AMENDED.
IS THAT ENOUGH? AND THE FLOOD, THE FLOOD BAN INFLAMMATION AND THE APPLICANT WILL RETURN TO THE HPC OR H P C A S NECESSARY REGARDING ANY FLOODING CONSTRUCTION.
AND THE APPLICANT WILL RETURN WITH INFORMATION REGARDING THE, THE FLOOD GUIDELINES, INFORMATION
[02:20:01]
AND INFORMATION QUOTE.SO WE'VE GOT IT WITHOUT A SECOND.
EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT IT IS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE OPPOSED.
UM, AND WHICH WE'VE GOT 1, 2, 3, 4.
SO, UH, WE GOT SIX, SIX OF US LEFT SIX.
SO WE GOT FIVE YESES AND ONE NOTICE OF THE MOTION PASS.
SO YOU, UH, UH, THE NEXT THING IS FOR US TO CALL FOR A MOTION TO ISSUE A COA FOR THE DEMOLITION.
WE'VE ALREADY DONE THE DEMOLITION, RIGHT? HAVE YOU ISSUED? YEAH.
BUT YOU CAN DO ISSUE IS COA FOR THE INFILL AND THEN MAKE SURE YOU DO ISSUE THE COA FOR THE DEMOLITION TO, OKAY.
WELL, LET'S START WITH THE DEMOLITION SINCE WE DID THAT FOR OUR, SO, SO CAN WE HAVE A MOTION FOR COA FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE HOUSE? THAT WAS SECOND RIGHT HERE.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
AND WHO WAS THE SECOND? THEY WOULDN'T GET A SECOND.
SO CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO ISSUE A COA FOR THE NEW INFIELD HOUSE? WELL, WAIT, SO WHOEVER YOU WANT TO PICK, WE GOT TO SET.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED.
SO WE GOT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, YES ONE.
AND SO THE MOTION PASSED FOR, UH, ISSUING A COA FOR THE INFIELD.
THANK YOU FOR DEALING WITH OUR INPUT.
SO WHAT'S LEFT IS FOR YOU TO GET BACK WITH MATH, UH, ABOUT THE FLOOD INFORMATION.
AND THEN IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO ANY KIND OF PLANNING, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE DOWN ANY TREES, ANY OF THAT, YOU WILL HAVE TO COME BACK AND SEE US.
WE HAVE TO RETURN, MR. AIN'T GOT GOTCHA.
CAN I HAVE ANOTHER MOTION AND COME BACK SO THAT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION.
SAY AYE, COME BACK AND JOIN, SIR.
[3.E. 305 North Ave. – to include demolishing the existing contributing house and replacing it with a new infill house.]
OKAY.SO 3 0 5 NORTH AVENUE HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF OF OUR LIST FOR TONIGHT AND IS COMING BACK IN JULY.
SO IT'S GOING TO RETURN IN JULY.
IS THERE REQUESTED A CONTINUANCE? THAT'S GOOD.
DO WE HAVE TO DO ANYTHING ON THAT? DO WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT.
SO WE VOTE FOR THE APPROVAL OF A CONTINUANCE.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE VOTING? TH THE MOTION MIGHT BE STYLED IN THIS MANNER.
THE MOVEMENT WOULD MOVE TO CONTINUE THE APPLICATION FOR 3 0 5 NORTH AVENUE INTO THE JULY, REGULAR MEETING OF THE HPC AT CITY HALL AT FIVE 30.
AND BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S UNAVAILABILITY.
AND IT'S GOING TO BE ON JULY THE 20TH, JULY THE 20TH, 2022 IN THE CITY HALL COURTROOM AT FIVE 30, BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S UNAVAILABILITY DURING THE JUNE MEETING.
CAN WE JUST HAVE THAT AS, AS, AS THE MOTION? YES MA'AM.
SO, WHICH I LIKE TO SECOND, HOW MUCH I CAN'T MAKE MY LANGUAGE GO AND MOVE FORWARD WITH HER LANGUAGE.
AND WE GOT A SECOND RIGHT HERE.
WHO IS THE MOTION I MADE THE MOTION IS TO BUSY MATE WITH HER LANGUAGE.
THAT'S THE MOTION I CAN DO THAT.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE'VE GOT A SECOND DOWN HERE.
SO THAT HAS BEEN MOVED TO JULY THE 20TH.
SO NOW WE'VE GOT 6 22 EACH FRONT STREET, AND THEN WE'VE GOT 2 26 NEW STREET.
[02:25:02]
YEAH.I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THEM LEAVING.
SO W
HOW IS THAT FAIR TO ME PLEASE? IS IT
UH, IF YOU WANT TO GIVE ME MY CARD, IF YOU WANT IT, YOU CAN COME, YOU CAN COME AND TALK.
YOU CAN COME AND TALK TO HIM IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD.
[3.F. 622 E. Front St. – to include the addition of a shed-roof dormer and upper deck on the existing non-contributing garage in the Tertiary AVC.]
ALL RIGHT.SO 6 22 EAST FLOOD STREET IS GOING TO BE OUR NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS.
SO SARAH, COULD YOU TELL US ABOUT 6 22 EAST FRONT STREET? SO HERE'S THE APPLICATION, UH, FOR THE OWNERS, JUSTIN AND JACKIE IN, SORRY, I APOLOGIZE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PRONOUNCE THAT.
UH, AND THEY'RE PROPOSING A NEW SHRED DORMER ON THEIR GARAGE WITH A DECK ALSO IN STAIRS ATTACHED.
AND THEY HAD, OOPS, SORRY, WENT THROUGH, THEY LISTED THE GUIDELINES AND THE MATERIALS, UH, AND SIGNED AND DATED THE RISK OF THE APPLICATION.
SO THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING GARAGE, WHICH EARLIER THIS EVENING, UM, THE PROJECT IS ACTUALLY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS GARAGE.
UH, AND THEN THE AREA FOR THIS IS ALSO SHOWN HERE.
UH, THE PROJECT IS THAT THE CORNER OF KING AND EDGERTON.
AND, UH, WE'LL SEE IN A MINUTE, BUT AT LEAST FROM AERIAL VIEW, THERE IS A YARD AREA BEHIND THIS GARAGE, UH, AND IN THE GARAGES HERE IN THE CENTER OF THIS AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH.
UM, SO AGAIN, THAT SAME PHOTO NOW WHEN WE LOOK TO THE RIGHT SIDE AND THEN, UH, AS WE ROUND, I GUESS TOWARDS THE BACK, THIS IS NOW A BEGIN TO SEE THE BACKSIDE OF THE GARAGE AS WE GO FARTHER OUT TO THE OTHERS, THE OTHER GABLE END.
SO THE GARAGE DOORS ARE OFF BEHIND THIS TREE HERE, RIGHT ON THAT SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
SO IT, AND MAYBE THE FLAG IS ANOTHER INDICATOR HERE.
YOU CAN SEE ON THE UPPER, RIGHT.
AND THE FLAG IS ON THE FAR SIDE.
NOW OVER HERE, THE FLAGS ON THE NEAR SIDE.
AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THE LEFT SIDE OF THE GARAGE.
AND THEN FINALLY IN THE LOWER RIGHT-HAND CORNER IS THE FULL BACK VIEW OF THE BACKSIDE OF THE GARAGE, UH, INCLUDING THE LANDSCAPING AND THE LAWN AND SUCH, UH, IN THE BACK OF THAT GARAGE.
SO THE PROJECT IS, UH, THIS IS THE CURRENT, UH, PLAN, UM, NOTHING SURPRISING THERE.
UH, AND THIS IS ALSO THE CURRENT ELEVATIONS OF THE GARAGE.
SO WE SAW THE GARAGE DOORS IN THE UPPER LEFT, AND THEN THE BACK IS THE LOWER LEFT AND THE TWO SIDES, THE OTHER FLOOR PLANS NOW TO SHOW THE FIRST FLOOR ON THE LEFT WITH THE GARAGE, OBVIOUSLY IT'S STILL A GARAGE, BUT THE UPPER FLOOR, UM, IS BEING CONVERTED TO BE A, UM, A STUDIO, A STUDIO APARTMENT AND THEN A DECK IS ADDED OUT THE BACK AND STEPS DOWN THE LEFT SIDE.
AND THEN FINALLY THE ROOT PLAN SHOWING THE NEW ROOF OVER THE NEW DORMER.
SO ON THE RIGHT TO SEE ESSENTIALLY THE, UH, THE DORMER, HOW IT'S, UM, PROJECTING OUT OVER THE BACKSIDE OF THE GARAGE.
AND THEN ON THE LOWER LEFT IS ESSENTIALLY THE STRAIGHT ON VIEW.
YOU CAN SEE THE DORMER DOES NOT TAKE UP THE FULL WIDTH OF THE BUILDING.
IT DOES STOP SHIRT, UH, BUT IT DOES HAVE, UH, EXPANSIVE GLASS, SOME RAILING FOR THE DECK.
AND I'M JUST ASSUMING THIS IS A SHADING OF THE EXISTING FIRST FLOOR SIDING.
SO THERE'S NOTHING NEW UNDERNEATH THERE.
UM, JUST, UH, OPEN AND THEN YOU CAN SEE IN THE LOWER, RIGHT.
THE STAIRWAY COMING DOWN TO THE GROUND, TH THAT THAT SIDE IS FACING THE HOUSE, RIGHT.
NOT THE STREET, THAT SPACE IN THE BACKYARD, THE STAIR SIDES, BUT YEAH, IT'S FACING THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
AND THE ONE FACING THE STREET IS THIS ONE AT THE TOP, RIGHT.
THAT'S FACING THE STREETS FACING
[02:30:01]
THE IT'S ESSENTIALLY EMPTY YARD, ISN'T IT? YEAH.IT'S REALLY, IT'S THE EDGE OF, YES.
THIS IS FACING EDGERTON AND THIS ONE IS FIT AND BOTTOM LEVEL.
SO THE PART FACING THE AGENDA IS REALLY STAYING THE SAME IT'S APART FACING BASICALLY WHAT YOU'LL SEE MOST IS FROM KING STREET.
SO IT'S THE BOTTOM LEFT ONE THAT YOU'LL, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL WILL BE MOST VISIBLE CAUSE IT'S THREE OF THE, THE LARGE EMPTY LOT.
AND THEN WE HAVE OUR, UM, ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REPORT HERE.
UM, SO FOR 6 22 WEEKS PRINCE STREET, IT DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, THE LAND USE ORDINANCE, AND IT WILL REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND THEN WE'RE READY WITH, UH OKAY.
OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION WAS SUBMITTED 2 26 EAST FRONT, NO 6 6 22, 22 UM, 6 22 WEEKS IN FRONT FOR GO ARCHITECTURAL AND IT'S PROPERLY MOTORIZED.
UH, IT'S A PHOTOGRAPH BECAUSE IT CAME FROM CALIFORNIA.
AND, UH, AND THEN, UH, LOOKING FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS WELL, UM, UH, I MAY NOT HAVE SOME THEM UH SO, OKAY.
UM, BUT WE'RE NOT AT THAT POINT YET.
SO, UM, YOU NEED TO, I GUESS THAT'S THE END OF THE SUMMARY.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND ASK IF THERE ARE ANY PEOPLE IN, CAN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT YOU'VE GOT? OKAY.
SO THERE'S ONLY TWO PEOPLE LEFT OUT IN THE AUDIENCE AND I KNOW WHATEVER IT IS FOR THE NEXT ONE.
AND YOU'RE FOR THIS ONE, BUT I'M GOING TO ADD NOTIFIED OPPONENTS NOTIFIED PROPONENTS.
THERE'S NOBODY THERE RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND HAS STANDING ANYONE, NOBODY, THEIR STATE CITY OR GOVERNMENT BODY, AND FOR INDIVIDUALS, THERE'S NOBODY THERE.
SO THERE'S NO REBUTTAL FOR MANY OF THOSE PERSONS.
SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TELL US THE STAFF FINDINGS.
[02:35:04]
OKAY.UM, SO OUR FINDINGS, I GUESS I'LL GO TO ANOTHER ONE TO GET THIS IS FOR THE PROJECT AT 6 22 EAST FRONT STREET, UM, FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED OWNERS.
AND, UM, LET'S SEE THE, UH, THE STRUCTURE, ALTHOUGH THE MAIN STRUCTURE IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
THE STRUCTURE OF THE GARAGE IS NOT.
UM, AND SO WHAT YOU GOT IN FRONT OF US IS 360.
SO I KNOW I'M USING THIS AS MY, MY TEMPLATE, SO, SORRY.
AND THEY LISTENED TO YOUR MELODIOUS VOICE, RIGHT? CLOSE YOUR EYES, AND THIS IS GOING TO BE LIKE A, SO, UM, YES, I'VE GOT IT.
WELL, I DO HAVE TO, I THINK I DO HAVE TO AT LEAST MENTION AND GO THROUGH SOME OF THE ROPE PIECES OF THIS.
SO THE PROJECT IS 4 6 22 EAST FRONT STREET.
AND, UH, THE, UH, THE GUIDELINES THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS APPLICATION, 3.2 0.1 4.2 0.5 THROUGH 4.3 0.2, UH, 4.3 0.3, 4.5 0.2 AND 4.5 0.4.
UM, AND WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
OH, WAIT, I HAVE TO DO THE FINDINGS.
SO THE PROJECT HAS RESTATEMENTS OR REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION AND STEPS ARE THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
UM, PROPOSAL IS IN ADDITION TO A NON-INCOME NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THE PROPOSED DESIGN AND COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS, THE GUIDELINES, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRUENCE WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION, UH, TO INCLUDE, IN ADDITION TO PATRICIA INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF A SHED ROOF, DORMER AND UPPER DECK ON THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING GARAGE IN THE TERTIARY.
ABC, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY COMMISSIONERS? IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY? ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT WE'VE GOT NOTHING THERE.
SO CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE MAKE A MOTION THEN WE GOT SOMEBODY OVER HERE WORKING ON THE MOTIONS.
I MUST HAVE EATEN YOUR LITTLE SHEET AND I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO GO AHEAD.
UM, MOMENT THAT WE FIND THE APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 6 22 IS FRONT STREET TO BE NOT IN CONGRESS WITH NEWBORNS COURT AFFORDED IN SECTIONS 15 DASH 41, 1 TO 15 DASH 4 29 IN NEWBURN IT'S HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS OF FAT.
SO GUIDELINES FOR ADDITIONS, UH, 3.3 0.2, WHICH IS A SIMILAR FORMS AND PITCHES DERIVED, UH, USING SIMILAR FORMS AND PITCHES IS ONLY ORIGINAL STRUCTURE GUIDELINE 3.3 0.3 MATERIALS DERIVED.
UH, SIMILAR MATERIALS ARE USED.
THEY'RE DERIVED FROM THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, UH, GUIDELINES, FOUR WALLS, TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.4, UH, WHICH DEALS WITH INCLUDING WOOD TRIMS, UH, AROUND OPENINGS IN THIS CASE, UH, GUIDELINES FOR WINDOWS DOORS AND OPENINGS GUIDELINE 4.3 0.3.
AND THAT ESSENTIALLY REQUIRES A TRUE DIVIDED LIGHT.
UH, THE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE PROJECT'S LOCATED IN A TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PATTERN PROPOSAL IS A
[02:40:03]
SMALL ONE STORY.ADDITION TO AN EXISTING WOOD STRUCTURE, A GARAGE, THE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES.
IT'S ONLY ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THE PROJECT, COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY THE PROJECTS, NOT IN CONGRESS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SECOND, SECOND, MADAM CHAIR, JUST FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, THE COMMENTS MADE BY MR. YEAR ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION MADE BY MR. BISBEE.
THOSE OPPOSED HEARING, NOT THE MOTION PASSED.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ISSUE A CON? DO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND? TONY'S A SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED HEARING NONE.
[Additional Item ]
SO NOW WE'RE TO 2 22 NEW STREET ARE SHARED THAT'S IN THE BACKYARD 2 26, I THINK IT WAS 2 26.WHAT DID I SAY? 2 26 IS THE CORRECT NUMBER.
SO A LITTLE BIT THE SORT OF THIS HAS BEEN CONTINUED FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING.
AND SO I RELOADED THE APPLICATION FROM THAT MEETING.
SO WE SHOULD HAVE EVERYTHING HERE.
UM, THIS IS THE APPLICATION FOR 2 26 NEW STREET FOR MR. RONALD AND HIS PANETTA, PENELOPE SONIA, UH, AND, UH, THEY HAVE A REFERENCE TO SOME ATTACHMENTS AND THEN CHECK IT OFF WITH SOME CHECKS AND THE SIGNATURE OF THE APPLICANT, UH, IS NOT ON THERE.
AND, UH, SO IT PROVIDED A SITE PLAN HERE.
SO WHAT TO, WHAT TO NOTE IS THAT THE I'M GOING, GONNA ZOOM IN HERE BECAUSE IT'S, THE SITE IS ACTUALLY HAS THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OF 40 FEET, A SIDE YARD, AND THEN THE FRONT, UM, APPARENTLY IS 42 POINT 25 FEET.
AND SO THE OTHER RECTANGLES ARE, UH, WHERE IT SAYS 42.
UM, THAT IS THE HOUSE ACTUALLY OUTLINED.
AND THEN ON THE RIGHT IS A FENCE THAT GOES ACROSS FROM THE HOUSE TO THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
UM, AND THE PROPOSAL IS THE BLUE RECTANGLE IN THE BACK CORNER BLOCK, UH, FORTUNATE.
AND YOU'LL PROBABLY REMEMBER THIS WHEN WE SEE WHEN WE SEE IT.
SO WHEN WE HAVE THE DRAWING HERE SHOWS THAT THERE'S A SETBACK OF THREE FEET, WHICH IS REQUIRED.
UM, AND THIS IS THE, UH, HOUSE UP ON THE FRONT.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE LITTLE WHITE FENCE HERE AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY.
SO THERE'S THE FENCE AND THE SPOT WHERE THEY SHED IS TO GO AS THIS, UH, AREA HERE WHERE THE FERNS AND OTHER GROCERIES ARE ON THE BROWN HERE BETWEEN THE, THE TWO TREES.
UH, THIS IS THE SKETCH AND SKETCH OF THE SHED AND THE SEVEN FOOT DIMENSION.
UH, THIS WALL WITH A WINDOW, A WINDOW WOULD BE FACING THE DRIVEWAY, CORRECT.
AND THE DOOR IS THEN FACING THE BACKYARD.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE REST OF THE INFORMATION, THIS REQUIREMENT OF THE APPLICATION.
SO PROJECT INFORMATION, SEVEN FOOT BY 10 FOOT BY EIGHT FOOT HIGH STORAGE SHED, UH, SITTING ON SIX BY SIX PRESSURE TREATED WOOD POSTS, CEMENT IN THE BROWN.
UM, WELL, UM, SHED CONSTRUCTED USING WOOD FRAME WOOD LAP SIDING WITH WOOD TRIM, MATCHING AND PROPORTIONAL TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTS, SIMILAR IN AND SCALE ALL WHAT IS TO BE PRIMED TO COATS AND PAINTED SAME AS THE EXISTING RESIDENTS.
A GABLE ROOF WILL HAVE ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLES AND BE SIMILAR IN SHAPE AND SLOPE AS THE EXISTING RESIDENTS AND THE STRUCTURE WE'LL HAVE ONE DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW FACING SOUTH ONE DOOR FACING WEST, AND THE STRUCTURAL SET UP RIGHT REAR NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE LOT AND THE TERTIARY ABC THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AT THE REAR AND SIDE AND INDICATES, UH, SOME OF THE GUIDELINES AND THE MATERIALS ARE PRESSURE TREATED WOOD FOR THE FOUNDATION FLOOR WOOD FOR THE FRAME SIDING AND
[02:45:01]
DOOR WOOD FRAME, DOUBLE HUNG GLASS WINDOW AND ARCHITECTURAL BLACK SHINGLES ON THE ROOF.AND SO THE ZONING AND INSPECTIONS THAT ARE HAVING SIGNATURES, UH, MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE ORDINANCE AND WILL NOT REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND THEN WE'RE READY WITH OUR REALLY DO HAVE THE, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS AS TIME.
OKAY, SIR, IS THERE A MEMBERS? IS THERE ANYBODY WHO HAS ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST, ANYBODY WHO BELIEVES THE PROJECT IS NOT COMPLETE? OKAY.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY AT THIS POINT IN TIME? NO, I THINK I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
LAST TIME I SENT THAT INFORMATION, UM, I THINK ONE WAS A PICTURE OF THE DOOR AND THEY ALSO HELP PILE.
THERE IS NO ONE LEFT IN THE AUDIENCE, SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL THE PROPONENTS, OPPONENTS, ALL THE REST OF THAT.
SO, UM, WE WILL THEN HEAR FROM YOU ABOUT YOUR STAFF FINDINGS.
UM, SO YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PROJECT AT 2 26 NEW STREET FOR RONALD AND PENELOPE IS ONLY A, SO THE HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME IS THE THOMAS B WHITEHURST HOUSE, WHICH IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
UM, WE HAVE THE NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY DESCRIPTION OF THE HOUSE, UM, WHICH INCLUDES IT'S BUILT IN CIRCA 1917.
IT'S FOUR SQUARE, TWO STORIES, THREE BAYS WIDE AT FIRST LEVEL, TRIPARTITE WINDOW AT SECOND LEVEL, FULL WIDTH, HIP ROOF, PORCH, AND HIP ROOF WITH DORMER AND AN INTERIOR CHIMNEY SANDBAG HAD NOTHING.
UM, SO, UH, THE PROJECT IS TO INCLUDE INSTALLATION OF A SHED IN THE TERTIARY, ABC AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES AS APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
ONE 6.1 AND THREE FOR DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 AND TWO FOR FOUNDATIONS, 4.1 0.3, WALLS TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION 4.2 0.4 AND FIVE WINDOWS, DOORS AND OPENINGS.
AND FOR CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5.5 0.1 2 3, 5 AND SIX.
AND THEN FOR STATEMENTS OR REASON, UH, BASED ON THE INFORMATION OBTAINED IN THE APPLICATION IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE, THE STRUCTURE IS A CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE AND THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN TO THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE TERTIARY.
ABC THREE, THE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES FOR THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
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 PERMISSION TO PROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE INSTALLATION OF A SHED IN THE TERTIARY ABC.
SO SIR, ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY AT THIS POINT IN TIME? THOSE OF US WHO ARE STILL HERE, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, ANY COMMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO ASK COMMENTS? YOU'D LIKE TO SAY, I DON'T HEAR ANY FROM ANY BRONZE, SO THEREFORE, WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A PROPOSAL? I MOVED THE WITH FIND THE APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 2 26 NEW STREET TO BE NOT IN CONGRESS WITH NEWBORNS CODE OF ORDINANCE, SECTION 15 DASH 4 1 1 TO 15 DASH 4 29 AND NEW HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS OF FACT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, 2.6 0.1 AND THREE DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 AND 3.1 0.2 FOUNDATIONS 3.1 0.3, WALLS TRIM 4.24 AND 4.2 0.5.
WHEN HIS STORE IS OPENINGS 4.3 0.2 AND 4.3 0.3, PAINT 5.4 0.23 AND FOUR, CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5.5 1 2, 3 AND FIVE AND SIX STATEMENTS OF FACT STRUCTURES OF CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES, FINDINGS OF FACT FINANCE PACK STRUCTURE TO CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE AND THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PATTERN PROJECTS WITHIN THE TERTIARY, ABC, THE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES.
SO ANY ADMINISTRATOR CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY TO PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRESS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
DO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND OVER THERE WITH JOINING ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
[02:50:01]
TO ISSUE A COA? SO WHO HAVE MOVED HAVE A SECOND BOAT TO MY LEFT.ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THOSE OPPOSED.
DON'T HEAR ANY YOU, UH, THE MOTION HAS PASSED SO YOU CAN GET YOUR COA, SIR.
THANK YOU FOR WAITING THROUGH ALL OF THIS.
UM, SO RUTH, CAN I ASK THE QUESTION? HAVE WE EVER HAD ANYBODY GET UPSET LIKE THAT BEFORE ABOUT HAVING NOT KNOWN ABOUT, UH, CONTINUING I'M WONDERING, IS IT, SHOULD WE POST SOMETHING IF SOMEBODY CONTINUES, YOU CAN'T ALWAYS KNOW FOR ONE, I GUESS IF YOU DO KNOW YOU COULD, I'M NOT SURE WHAT HE GOT UPSET ABOUT.
I DON'T KNOW WHEN HE GOT UPSET ABOUT HE HAD BEEN WAITING FOR THAT, UM, THAT PARTICULAR APPLICATION THAT WE HAD TO CONTINUE.
AND SO I DIDN'T KNOW THAT I THOUGHT HE WAS 4, 3 22, RIGHT.
WELL, SO DID YOU, DID YOU KNOW THIS? WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT HE WAS WAITING FOR THAT.
I HAVE NOT MET HIM AND I DID NOT KNOW HE WAS WAITING FOR 3 0 5.
UH, THAT'S WHAT I MEANT TO SAY THAT I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT'S EVER BEEN AN ISSUE AND, BUT I DID IT, BUT THEN I'M NOT AT THE BEGINNING OF A MEETING DID NOT, NOT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING SAY THAT WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT.
I THINK WE MIGHT'VE DONE THIS ON THE FRONT DOOR WHERE IT HAS THE AGENDA PUT THAT HAS BEEN CONTINUED OR SOMETHING.
AND THEN IF WE KNOW AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, WE'VE BEEN MENTIONED IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND IT MAY HAVE BEEN THAT HE DIDN'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIMING ON THAT WAS.
BUT, UM, IF HE HAD MISSED THAT ANNOUNCEMENT, IF IT WAS ON A DOOR AND THEN WE, YOU COVERED, YOU KNOW, THAT WAY AND IT DIDN'T, SHE DIDN'T, WE ASKED TO AGREE TO PEOPLE TO, TO ADD THIS TO THE LIST NIGHT.
TH THE GENTLEMEN, I THINK THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN IS REFERENCING, WAS HERE FOR 3 0 5 NORTH AVENUE.
WELL MAYBE WHAT MAYBE WHAT WE CAN DO NEXT TIME IS, UH, IF THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE GOING UP THAT WE KNOW ABOUT THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE HARD TO LIE, THAT WE COULD SAY THAT THE BEGINNING WOULD THAT BE HELPFUL? OKAY.
IT'S CERTAINLY THIS COMMISSION'S PREROGATIVE.
YOU WANT TO ADDRESS ANY CONTINUANCES FIRST OR REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE? SWEAR.
I GOT CONFUSED AND HE WAS, I THOUGHT HE WAS AT THIS AT THE, UH, UH, 3 22 THING.
AND I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY I WAS LEAVING.
IT MIGHT JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S MORE OF A GOODWILL GESTURE REALLY THEN.
UM, I'VE GOT, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT WAS EVER IN ALL THESE YEARS.
IT HAPPENED VERY MUCH, BUT OH YES.
PEOPLE HAVE GOTTEN UPSET BEFORE THEY'VE GOT UPSET WHEN THINGS GO A LONG, LONG TIME.
SO, NOT THAT IN PARTICULAR, NOT IN MY MEMORY THAT, YOU KNOW, TAKE AWAY.
I THINK WE COULD MAKE IT A POINT OF ORDER JUST TO MENTION IF THERE ARE CHANGES TO THE AGENDA AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND THAT ANY CHANGE, THAT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHO'S HERE UNTIL WE GET TO THE IVY.
SO EITHER YOU HAVE, WE HAVE A CHOICE, EITHER DO ALL THE CHANGES UP FRONT SO EVERYBODY CAN KNOW, OR YOUR ROLL CALL, WHATEVER, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL SOMETIMES, SOMETIMES YOU DO KNOW.
AND IF YOU DO KNOW, YOU CAN ANNOUNCE THAT WE DID KNOW, OBVIOUSLY IT WAS IN MY PRESENTATION HERE.
SO I KNEW A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO.
SO WE'LL MAKE THAT PART OF OUR, UM, DISCUSSION, UH, COMP COMMISSIONER COMMENTS PORTION.
AND IF YOU WANT TO, YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA THAT, UH, I CHANGED THE AGENDA ACCORDINGLY.
YOU CAN PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA, CHANGES TO THE AGENDA WILL BE NOTED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN THE END, THE AGENDA.
IF I'M SAYING TO MY SAYING THAT, RIGHT? YEP.
SO YOU CAN PUT THAT UP TOP, SOMEWHERE.
SO UP THERE IN NUMBER, UH, ONE, TWO OR THREE.
YOU PUT IT UP IN THERE SOMEWHERE AND WHEN WE CAN DO
[02:55:01]
THAT.ANYBODY ELSE? ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? NOPE.
SO ALL BUSINESS, DO WE HAVE ANY WHOLE BUSINESS THAT WE NEED TO GO OVER? OKAY.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME? YEAH.
SO WE HAVE NO NON HEARING ITEMS. TABLEWARE CONTINUED FROM A PREVIOUS MEETING.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY GENERAL COMMENTS BECAUSE THERE'S NO GENERAL PUBLIC OUT THERE.
WE DON'T HAVE WITH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY NEW BUSINESS THAT WE KNOW OF.
[7. HPC Administrator’s Report]
WE HAVE THE ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT, WHICH WE CAN READ.AND HE'S GIVEN US INFORMATION ON THAT, UH, REPORT ON COA EXTENSIONS ISSUES SINCE THE PRIOR REGIMEN.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS OR UPDATES BY THE ADMINISTRATOR? NO.
[8. Commissioners’ Comments]
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THAT? WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT MAKING THAT ANNOUNCEMENT EARLIER UNDER COMMISSIONER COMMENT? YEP.DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER COMMENT? OKAY.
OH, UM, ACTUALLY, SO, UH, ONE ITEM UPDATE BY THE ADMINISTRATOR IS THAT, UM, THERE ARE SEVERAL TERMS THAT ARE COMING TO AN END AT THE END OF JUNE.
UM, IF YOU, IF YOU ARE NOT REAPPOINTED OR IF YOU HAVE NOT YET BEEN REPLACED, UM, YOU ARE EXPECTED TO CONTINUE SERVING UNTIL YOU ARE REAPPOINTED OR REPLACED.
WHAT, WHAT HAVE WE DONE ABOUT, SO JOHN BLACKWATER IS NOT COMING BACK.
SO WE WERE LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY TO REPLACE HIM ACTIVELY? YES.
CAN I HAVE A LEGEND FOR US TO ADJOURN?
SHE PUT THE HAND RIGHT UP THERE.