[00:00:01]
BELL.[1. Opening of Meeting with Roll Call]
WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.UH, WE'LL FIRST DEAL WITH ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA.
AND VICE CHAIR TRIP ER IS ALSO EXCUSED.
UH, WE HAVE A WE HAVE A QUORUM.
[2. Adjustments to the Agenda]
DO WE NEED A MOTION TO MOVE 3 0 5 NORTH TO THE, TO THE END, OR CAN WE JUST DO THAT? YOU CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF THERE'S GOING TO BE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE AGENDA.WE'RE GONNA, I NEED A MOTION TO PUT 3 0 5 NORTH AVENUE, UH, BEHIND 2 21 SOUTH FRONT STREET.
CONSENT AGENDA WE HAVE THE OTHER ADJUSTMENTS WOULD BE WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA.
THERE ARE TWO MISSING MINUTES, THE 19TH OF OCTOBER AND THE 16TH OF MARCH.
SO WE CAN HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THOSE TWO SETS OF MINUTES.
IS THAT RIGHT? YOU COULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO REMOVE ITEMS. UM, TWO.
A TWO AND THREE FROM THE AGENDA.
JIM, YOU GOT THE FIRST MOTION.
MOTION TO, UH, REMOVE, UH, ITEMS TWO AND THREE UNDER A, UH, APPROVAL OF, UH, MINUTES OR PREVIOUS MEETINGS.
UH, THOSE HAVE RECENTLY, RECENTLY BEEN PROVIDED, BUT WERE NOT PART OF THE PACKAGE IN, UH, THE COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME TO REVIEW THOSE.
WE, UH, REMOVE A TWO AND THREE FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[3. Consent Agenda]
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS CHANGED TO WHO? SECOND.WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS CHANGED.
[4A. Hearings: Introduction, Swearing-In, Summary of Process - Introduction of Hearings and Rules of Procedure - Swearing-In of Speakers - Summary of the Hearing Process]
OPENING REMARKS.HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IS A PUBLIC COMMISSION APPOINTED BY THE CITY OF NEW BERNS BOARD OF ALDERMAN AS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESERVING AND SAFEGUARDING NEW BERNS LOCALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICTS DOWNTOWN IN RIVERSIDE BASED ON US DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR STANDARDS, STATE STATUTES, CITY ORDINANCES, AND NEW BE'S HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
TWO OF THE MAJOR TASKS OF HPC INCLUDE APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS AND PREVENTING DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES DUE TO NEGLECT WHERE A QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY HEARING AND APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS.
THE COMMISSION HERE SWORN TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, BY PARTIES WHO HAVE RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE HEARING AND BY OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THEY HAVE RELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT'S, THAT ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE APPLICATION.
THE COMMISSION CAN'T CONSIDER COMMENTS BASED ON PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES, HEARSAY OR PERSONAL OPINION THAT CANNOT BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO SPECIFIC HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
AND LIKEWISE, THE COMMISSIONERS WILL REFRAIN FROM USING PERSONAL OPINION, ET CETERA.
COMMISSION'S DECISIONS WILL, ARE, ARE BASED SOLELY ON THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED THAT RELATES TO THE STORE GUIDELINES.
SO CAN WE SWEAR IN THE, THE, UH, PRESENTERS? YES, CERTAINLY.
ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK THIS EVENING, PLEASE COME FORWARD PLEASE.
PLEASE SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE.
AND NAME WE HAVEN'T ALREADY DONE.
SO DO WE HAVE ALL FREE NAMES UP THERE? OKAY.
THE, THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING TO FILE, THE HPC ADMINISTRATOR WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES OR, OR THE APPLICANT CAN, CAN, UH, ADD TO THAT.
PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WHO RECEIVE NOTICE OF HEARING CAN PROVIDE EVIDENCE.
UM, IF THERE ARE, UH, UH, THOSE KINDS OF, UH, INDICATIONS, OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAVE RELE RELEVANT INFORMATION
[00:05:01]
AND WILL BE DIRECTLY, UH, AFFECTED, CAN PROVIDE EVIDENCE.THE HPC ADMINISTRATOR WILL PRESENT THE STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION.
THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE FINAL COMMENTS.
THE COMMISSION WILL THEN DISCUSS THE EVIDENCE AND ASK FOR CLARIFICATION.
I'LL CALL FOR THEN FOR A MOTION ON THE APPLICATION, AND WE'LL HAVE A VOTE ON THE MOTION.
[4C. 221 S. Front St. – to amend the approved CoA to delete the addition, and for new lighting, revised fencing, sitework, and parking in all AVCs.]
DO 2 21 FRONT STREET? YES.WE'LL START RIGHT HERE WITH THE, UH, ILLUSTRATION ON THE SCREEN IS THE, UH, SITE PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT.
THE, UH, THIS PROJECT IS ACTUALLY AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING, UH, COA.
AND SO, UM, UH, WE'LL SEE THAT IN A SECOND.
BUT, UH, FIRST WHILE WE'RE ON THIS SCREEN, WE'LL GO OVER SOME OF THE, UH, PROJECT PARTS.
UH, ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS THE SITE PLAN ITSELF.
THE PURPLE LINE IS THE PROPERTY LINE, AND THEN THE RECTANGLE, THE LARGE RECTANGLE AT THE TOP OF THE STRIPES ON IT IS THE ROOF OF THE EXISTING HARVEY MANSION.
SO, AND AT THE BOTTOM, UH, PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS THE PARK, THE PROPOSED PARKING LOT, UH, AREA.
UH, ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS, WILL BE A NEW DRIVEWAY.
AND THEN, UH, THERE, IN ADDITION TO THOSE PRIMARY ITEMS, UH, THERE'S A SIDEWALK, A, A FOUNTAIN.
RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY, THERE IS SOME NEW LANDSCAPING THAT'S SHOWN AS THOSE, UH, DARKER CIRCLES.
UH, AND ABOVE THOSE DARKER CIRCLES IS A GRAY RECTANGLE, WHICH REPRESENTS A NEW, UH, DECK ON THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
UH, AND THEN THE OTHER SIGNIFICANT ITEMS, UH, FROM THE SITE PLAN POINT OF VIEW IS TOWARDS THE TOP OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY AND IS, UH, WHICH IS THE, UH, SOUTH FRONT STREET FRONTAGE.
UH, THERE WILL BE SOME NEW, UH, BRICK WALLS THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN THEY WERE IN THE PREVIOUS, UH, PROOF PROPOSAL AS WELL AS, UM, GAS LANTERNS.
AND THEN WE'LL SEE A FEW MORE FEATURES ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING AS WELL.
SO THIS IS ACTUALLY THE, UH, COA THAT WAS ISSUED FOR THE PREVIOUS, UH, PROPOSAL, WHICH WAS A ONE STORY EDITION, UH, FOR A RESTAURANT AND SITE MODIFICATIONS IN THE SECONDARY AND TER TERTIARY ABCS.
ALSO TO NOTE HERE, THERE WAS A SERIES OF CONDITIONS THAT WERE INVOLVED WITH THAT.
UH, SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, UH, THE APPLICANTS HAVE RECEIVED A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THEIR ZONING, UH, CLASSIFICATION FOR THE, UH, CHANGE IN THE PROPOSED USE.
UH, AND SO THAT'S WHAT THIS DOCUMENT IS, SO THAT IT SHOWS YOU THAT THEY DO HAVE, THEY DO HAVE THE ZONING APPROVAL TO DO THIS.
UH, THERE WAS ONE CONDITION TO THIS, AND THAT WAS, IF YOU CAN SEE THE UNDERLINED AREA AT THE TOP OF THE SCREEN HERE, AND ACCESS EASEMENT, ALLOWING EGRESS INTO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH MUST BE RECORDED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THIS HEARING.
UH, ABOUT 45 MINUTES AGO, WE RECEIVED THAT, UH, ACCESS, UH, AGREEMENT THAT HAS BEEN, UM, FULLY EXECUTED.
UH, SO THAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED.
UH, YOU'LL SEE THAT COME UP IN THE ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REPORT.
SO THESE FOUR IMAGES ARE THE EXISTING, UH, ELEVATIONS OF HARVEY MANCHIN.
UH, THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS THE UPPER RIGHT PICTURE.
SO THE, UM, THE STREET SIDE, UH, ELEVATION, UH, THERE ARE NO, THERE ARE NO DOORS ON THAT SIDE.
UH, PRIMARY ENTRANCE IS ON THE BACK, WHICH IS ON THE LEFT, UPPER LEFT, THE SOUTH ELEVATION.
UH, AND THEN, UH, THE TWO SIDES ARE ALSO SHOWN.
THEY ALSO HAVE SOME ENTRANCES AS WELL.
SO, UM, ESSENTIALLY GOING ONE ELEVATION AT A TIME.
AND I WILL NOW ZOOM IN SO WE GET MORE DETAIL HERE.
THIS BEING THE FRONT ELEVATION OR THE STREET SIDE ELEVATION.
A A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK THE SOUTH SIDE IS THE FRONT SIDE, CAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU GET MOST PEOPLE GO IN.
WE'RE USED TO, UM, STILL NOT BIG ENOUGH.
CAN'T READ THOSE WORDS, RIGHT.
SO FROM THE FRONT, UH, I'LL START ON THE LEFT.
UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE PROPOSING A NEW, UH, FOUR FOOT HIGH BRICK LATTICE WALL, UH, WITH A BRICK PIER AND THEN AN OPENING FOR THE DRIVEWAY.
[00:10:01]
BRICK PIER THAT IS NOW SIX FEET TALL WITH A LANTERN ON THE TOP.UH, I BELIEVE THAT'S A GAS LANTERN.
AND THEN, UH, TO THE RIGHT OF THAT IS A, ATTACHED TO THAT BRICK PIER IS ANOTHER BRICK WALL THAT IS, UH, SOLID ON THE BOTTOM AND LATTICE WORK ON THE TOP.
UH, AND THE THEN, UH, IN FRONT OF THAT WALL IS A PROPOSED TO BE A NEW, UH, FREESTANDING SIGN ATTACHED TO THE GROUND WITH NO POST.
THEN CONTINUING LEFT TO RIGHT, UH, NEW LANTERN ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
AND THEN, UH, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING WILL BE A NEW SIGN AND TWO WALL MOUNTED SPOTLIGHTS.
THEN ANOTHER AMERICAN FLAG BETWEEN THE LAST TWO WINDOWS, OOPS.
AND THEN A LANTERN ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE.
THEN ON THE RIGHT WE HAVE A BRICK SCREEN WALL, AGAIN WITH THE BRICK LATTICEWORK ON THE TOP, LEADING OVER TO IT.
ANOTHER, UH, BRICK PIER WITH ANOTHER LANTERN GAS LANTERN ON THE TOP.
UH, A NEW ORNAMENTAL IRON GATE, A SHORTER, UH, UM, BRICK PIER, AND THEN A SHORTER LATTICE BRICK WALL.
SO THAT'S ESSENTIALLY ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE.
OKAY, SO FROM THE, UH, EAST SIDE.
UH, SO FROM THE, UM, FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER SIDE, THE STREET IS ON THE RIGHT AND THE PARKING LOT IS ON THE LEFT.
UM, SO AGAIN, LEFT TO RIGHT, I GUESS.
UH, THERE ARE SOME, THERE'S SOME TREES IN THE, UH, PARKING LOT AND SHRUBS AND A FOUNTAIN.
UH, AND THEN THE EXISTING STAIRWAY, UH, WILL REMAIN AND THE EXISTING DECK AND BALESTRA WILL BE REPLACED WITH A NEW DECK TO MATCH THE EXISTING.
THEN, UH, ABOVE THE DECK WILL BE, AND WE'LL SEE THIS ON THE REAR ELEVATION MUCH MORE CLEARLY.
THERE WILL BE A NEW CURVED SEMICIRCULAR, OR ARCHED, LET'S JUST PUT IT THAT WAY.
UH, EYEBROW LIKE ROOF, UH, STICKING OUT FROM THE BUIL ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING.
AND, UH, UH, STICKING OUT FROM THE BUILDING A FEW FEET.
UH, AND THAT WILL HAVE STANDING SEAM, UH, METAL ROOFING, THE EXISTING BALCONIES, UM, ALREADY SHOWN THERE OR SOON TO BE EXISTING.
UH, THEN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SOUTH, I MEAN, EAST ELEVATION, UH, IS, UH, A NEW SHELTER OVER THE SIDE DOORWAY.
AND IT'S A SMALL CURB FOR THE BRICK WALKWAY.
AND HERE YOU CAN SEE THE PLACEMENT OF THE WALL RELATIVE TO THE FRONT FACE OF THE BUILDING.
THE, THE BRICK PIER WITH THE LANTERN ON THE TOP, UM, IS SEVERAL FEET BEHIND THE FRONT EDGE.
AND THEN THE SIGN IS SEVERAL FEET IN FRONT OF THAT, BUT STILL BEHIND THE FRONT EDGE OF THE, UH, STRUCTURE.
AND WE CAN SEE THE AMERICAN FLAG AND HAVE AN IDEA OF THE LOCATION OF THE BLADE SIGN.
WE'LL HAVE A DETAIL OF THAT IN A MINUTE.
NEXT IS THE SOUTH ELEVATION, THE MAIN ENTRY.
AND THIS ONE, UH, THE CHANGES, UH, RELATIVE TO THIS, UH, UH, AMENDMENT ARE THE SHRUBS, THE FOUNTAIN, THE EXISTING, WELL, NOT THE EXISTING STAIR STAYS THERE.
THE DECK, UH, YOU CAN NOW SEE IT'S, UH, BREADTH, UH, ACROSS THE, UH, FACADE.
AND THEN, UM, THE OTHER ITEMS ON THE RIGHT IN THE BACKGROUND, REALLY.
NEXT, OH, OH, AND SORRY, THE MAIN THING THEN ON THIS ELEVATION WAS THE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF.
THE ARCHWAY IS SHOWN HERE OVER THE ARCHED, UM, DOORWAY ENTRANCE.
SO AGAIN, WE SEE THE SAME ITEMS ON THE FRONT HANGING OUT.
THEN ON THIS SIDE, THE BRICK WALL IS CLOSER TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, BUT STILL, UH, BACK FROM THE EDGE.
AND THEN THE, UH, MECHANICAL ENCLOSURE AND SUCH IS OVER, WAS PRE-APPROVED THE LAST TIME.
NEW HERE IS, I BELIEVE THE GARBAGE ENCLOSURE.
UH, AND THEN, UH, THE TRANSFORMER IS SOMETHING THAT GOT MOVED.
THERE, WAS PRESENTED THE LAST TIME AS WELL.
UH, IT GOT MOVED THERE WITH A MINOR, UH, COA.
UM, THEN WE HAVE THE SAME KIND OF LOW SLOPE STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF OVER THIS DOORWAY AS WELL.
[00:15:03]
AND MANY OF THE SAME THINGS WE ALREADY MENTIONED ON THE OTHER ELEVATIONS.LEMME MAKE THESE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER.
UM, THE, UH, ONE ON THE LEFT IS FOR THE BALCONY BALUSTRADES, BUT, UH, THOSE ARE ALSO PRE-APPROVED.
UM, SO NOW THAT EYEBROW O UM, ROOFING OVERHANG DETAIL HAS BEEN ADDED SINCE THE DESIGN REVIEW MEETING.
UH, THIS IS REALLY A SECTION THROUGH THE TOP OF, AT, LIKE, AT THE PEAK OF THE ARCH.
AND SO WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE UNDERSIDE OF THE ARCH, UH, HERE IN THIS VIEW.
UH, AND YOU CAN SEE THE METALS, THIS STANDING SEA METAL ROOF, UH, AS REFERRED TO ON THE TOP.
UH, AND THERE'S A METAL FASCIA PIECE, UM, UH, FOR, UH, UH, RAIN AND DRIP CONTROL, UH, AS WELL AS SOME WOOD FASCIA BOARDS THERE.
UM, AND IT'S ALSO HAS A METAL, A WOOD BRACKET DETAIL.
THEN THE, UH, SIGN ITSELF, THE BLADE SIGN UP FRONT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING.
UM, THIS IS THE KIND OF THE DESIGN THAT THEY HAVE IN MIND FOR THIS.
AND THEN THESE ARE ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FROM THE PAST.
SO THE HISTORY OF DOCUMENTS AND A HISTORY OF WITH PHOTOGRAPHS ARE ON THESE PAGES.
AND THAT'S IT, EXCEPT FOR OUR ZONING AND INSPECTION REPORT, WHICH, UM, INDICATES THAT IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE ORDINANCES.
UH, AND THEN THIS WAS THE ACCESS EASEMENT REQUIRED BY THE, UH, SPECIAL USE PERMIT, UH, BEING RECORDED AS PENDING.
SO THAT'S NOW NO LONGER PENDING, BUT HAS BEEN ACHIEVED.
AND THE PROPOSED, UH, THE CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR INDICATES THAT THE PRO PROPOSED PROJECT WILL, UH, REQUIRE BUILDING PERMITS, BUT THOSE PERMITS HAVE ALREADY BEEN ISSUED, UH, BECAUSE WORK HAS BEGUN, UH, RELATIVE TO THE PREVIOUS APPROVALS.
SO, AND THEN WE ARE READY FOR OUR, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
DO YOU WANT TO ADD, ADD SOMETHING TO THAT? UM, SURE.
UH, HI, MY NAME'S EMILY SIGMAN.
UM, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT.
UM, AS MATT KINDA, UM, HINTED ON IT A LITTLE BIT, UM, FROM OUR LAST MEETING, WE DID, UM, ADD THE DETAIL OF THE OVERHANG PRIMARILY TO SHOW THAT, UM, THE MATERIALS WOULD BE THE SAME AS THE BALCONY WITH THE TONGUE AND GROOVE ON THE UNDERSIDE OF IT, AND THEN THE BLACK FASCIA ON THE OUTSIDE.
UM, AND THEN THE FASCIA, UM, SIZE AND STYLE WILL BE THE SAME AS WELL.
UM, AND THEN WE ADDED A FEW KEYNOTES TO BETTER INDICATE MATERIALS AS WELL.
OTHERWISE, I'M OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY PROPONENTS OR OPPONENTS OF THE PROJECT THAT WANT TO SPEAK? THAT GENTLEMAN, I GUESS IS FOR SOMETHING.
I, HE FOR PROJECT READY FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS? YEAH.
SO THESE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR, UM, UH, JOHN HARVEY LLCS PROJECT FOR HARVEY MANCHIN, UH, BUILT CIRCA 1798.
IT IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AND THE LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY DESCRIPTION FROM 2003 DESCRIBES THE BUILDING AS FEDERAL STYLE.
THREE STORIES ABOVE, RAISED BASEMENT FIVE PHASE WIDE WITH PAIRED CENTRAL WINDOWS ABOVE AN ARCHED ENTRANCE, UH, UH, INTERIOR END CHIMNEYS AND GABLE AND PARAPET ROOF.
THE SAND BACK DESCRIPTION FROM 1988, THE ONLY RELEVANT PIECE SEEMED TO BE IT WAS CONVERTED TO APARTMENTS IN THE 1940S.
UH, SO FROM, UH, THE APPLICATION FOR THIS 2 21 SOUTH FRONT STREET IS TO AMEND THE APPROVED COA TO DELETE THE ADDITION AND FOR NEW LIGHTING, REVISED FENCING, SITE WORK AND PARKING IN ALL ABCS.
SO, STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING.
HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES ARE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION.
PUBLIC AND OPEN SPACES 2.2 0.1, UTILITIES, 2.3 0.12 AND SIX.
[00:20:01]
0.34 AND SEVEN FOR FENCES AND GARDEN WALLS, 2.5, 0.1, TWO AND THREE FOR PARKING, 2.7 0.5 FOR SIGNAGE, 2.8 0.2 AND THREE FOR DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 FOR MODIFICATIONS, 3.2 0.1 3.2 0.2 FOR ENTRANCES, 4.4 0.1 AND FOUR FOR ROOFS.4.5 0.4 FOR DECKS AND PATIOS, 3.6 0.2 AND THREE, 4.6 0.3.
UH, I HIGHLIGHTED STRUCTURALLY SEPARATING THE DECK.
UH, AND THEN ACCESSIBILITY AND LIFE SAFETY.
4.7 0.2 AND THREE FOR MASONRY.
5.4, 0.1, TWO, THREE, AND FOUR FOR STATEMENTS OF REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION AND STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE, THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE DENSE FABRIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE PROPOSAL IS A PROJECT FOR A NEW EYEBROW ROOF OVER THE REAR ENTRANCE, REPLACEMENT, REAR DECK, EXTERIOR LIGHTING, SIGNAGE, BRICK FENCING, LANDSCAPING FOUNTAIN, AND SITE WORK.
THE PROPOSED DESIGN COMPONENTS AND MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES.
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND FIVE, THE PROJECT IS NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION APPROVE THIS APPLICATION TO INCLUDE ONE.
UH, THERE'S NO ADDITION, UH, BUT SITE MODIFICATIONS IN THE SECONDARY AND TERTIARY ABCS WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS TO ADD TREES, SHRUBBERY, AND OTHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES AROUND THE PERIPHERY OF THE LOT.
SECOND, A DRAWING SHOWING THE SEPARATION OF THE DECK FROM THE EXISTING BUILDING TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE H P A FOR THEIR FOR HPC REVIEW.
AND THIRDLY, TO VERIFY AN ADA COMPLIANT ACCESS IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THIS BUILDING.
IT IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE DESIGN DRAWINGS FOR A MINOR WORKS REVIEW AND AMENDMENT TO THIS COA.
ANY FINAL COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT? YOU DON'T HAVE TO, YES.
UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONER? YES.
SO, UH, LOOKING AT THE BUILDING STANDING ON THE STREET, SO YOU ALL INVENTED THIS GREAT BIG ENTRANCEWAY WHILE WALL, AND SO ALL OF THAT'S GONE NOW YEAH.
IN THIS APPLICATION, IS THAT RIGHT? YES.
SO THE RESTAURANT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED, UM, IN THE PREVIOUS COA, UM, IS NO LONGER, UH, BEING CONSTRUCTED.
SO YOU'RE JUST HAVING THAT LITTLE DOOR THAT WAS THERE BEFORE? YES.
WE JUST HAD MUCH DISCUSSION ABOUT ALL OF THAT, TRYING TO GET THAT SEVEN
WE WENT ROUND AND ROUND ABOUT IT.
AND NOW YOU'VE JUST UP AND DONE IT AWAY WITH.
THE POWER OF THE COMPUTER IN THE PICTURE.
UM, THE BRICK WALL ON THE FRONT STREET, HOW TALL IS THAT? UH, WITH THE LATTICE? UM, SO THE SOLID WALL IS FOUR FEET AND THEN THE LAT IS AN ADDITIONAL TWO, SO IT WOULD BE SIX IN TOTAL.
IT GOES TO THE BOTTOM OF THE MECHANICAL, UM, PLATFORM THAT'S ALSO ALONG THAT STREET.
ARE YOU CONSIDERING THIS THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING? UM, IT'S, I GUESS THE STREET SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
THE MAIN ENTRANCE WOULD BE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FRONT STREET SIDE, RIGHT? YES.
BECAUSE DON'T WE SAY FOUR FOOT IN FRONT? IT'S NOT IN FRONT.
IT'S BEHIND THE FACE OF THE WALL.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT IN THIS DRAWING, BUT THAT'S RIGHT.
AND THAT, THAT'S WHY I POINTED OUT ON THE SIDE VIEWS, UM, THAT THE, UH, LIKE THIS ONE HERE, UM, THAT THE, UH, THE WALL IS, OOPS, IS ATTACHED TO THAT CALL.
YOU CAN SEE HERE, UH, THIS IS WHERE THE WALL IS LOCATED, WHERE THE PIER WHERE WHERE THE IS IS.
AND IT SHOWS IN THE PLAN VIEW AS WELL, BUT UH, IT'S MORE EASILY CAN SEE EASIER HERE ON, ON THE SIDE WITH WHERE THE H AND B EQUIPMENT IS.
I, I THOUGHT ORIGINALLY THERE WERE TREES OUTSIDE THE WALL THERE.
IS THAT NOT THE CASE? UM, YES, WE TALKED ABOUT THE COVER.
[00:25:01]
THING UP.BECAUSE IT IS CERTAINLY VERY UGLY.
WAS WAS THAT REMOVED BY OR JUST AN OVERSIGHT? UM, THOSE WERE REMOVED.
SO IS THERE GONNA BE ANYTHING TO COVER UP THAT UGLY THING? UM, THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY IN THE PLAN TO HAVE ANY VEGETATION ALONG THE STREET SIDE.
CAN YOU PUT SOMETHING THERE, JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY? THEY WERE THERE ORIGINALLY AND, AND NOTHING'S CHANGED.
SO WE DID HAVE TO, UM, PUSH THAT BRICK WALL UP JUST SLIGHTLY.
UM, AND WE JUST DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THERE WAS ENOUGH SPACE BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND WHERE THAT BRICK WALL IS.
HOW MUCH SPACE IS THERE TO HAVE? UM, IT'S ABOUT TWO FEET, UM, TO HAVE A TREE.
WHAT ABOUT SRU OR LANDSCAPE? WHAT ABOUT SHRUBS? THAT'LL GROW TALL AND COVER THAT UP, BUT STILL TWO FEET IS GONNA BE TOO NARROW TO HAVE A DENSE PLANTING THERE.
I GUESS TWO FEET IS ALMOST NOTHING FOR DENSE.
WELL, NOT TO COVER SOMETHING UP.
I MEAN, YOU CAN HAVE SOME SHRUBS THERE, BUT NOT NOTHING HIGH TO COVER A SIX FEET WALL.
BUT NOT IN TWO FEET WIDE STRIP.
WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS THEN? YOU'RE TRYING TO COVER UP THE, UM, THE MECHANICAL UNITS, RIGHT? NOT THE RIGHT.
SO THERE IS BALESTRA THAT IS THERE OR BEEN APPROVED FOR THAT MM-HMM.
CUZ WE TALKED ABOUT THAT LAST TIME.
SO BEFORE WE WERE COVERING UP LATTICE AND NOW IT'S A, IT'S A PATTERNED BRICK WALL, SO IT'S KIND OF ITS OWN CAMOUFLAGE KIND OF.
OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, THERE'S BEEN NO LANDSCAPING APPROVED WITH THIS.
I'M, I'M LOOKING AT MATT'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE LANDSCAPING.
JUST, AND THIS IS JUST A QUESTION CAUSE WE'VE GONE THROUGH A NUMBER OF DECORATIONS HERE.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON THE, UH, GUIDELINE THAT REQUIRES LANDSCAPING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF A PROPERTY.
AND SO IT WAS JUST, UH, A LITTLE BIT SPARSE IN THAT AREA.
UM, TRYING TO FIND THE, UM, THE ACTUAL SITE PLAN HERE AND HERE WE GO.
THERE'S BEEN NO, I'M, I'M NOT TOO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
THE DETAILS OF THE LANDSCAPING WILL, WE'LL GET TO THAT WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE.
UH, AND THEN THE ADA, THERE'S BEEN NO DISCUSSION OF ADA AT THIS POINT ONCE THAT'S DECIDED.
YOUR, UH, PRINCIPAL OF MVF ARCHITECTS.
AND, AND SO, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS A, UH, UH, A HOTEL USE, UH, THERE ARE SOME PROVISIONS IN THE BUILDING CODE, UH, THAT RELATE TO THE PROXIMITY OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT TO THE WIDTH OF THE LOT, UM, TO THE PUBLIC ACCESS.
AND BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT ABOVE GRADE, UM, WE'RE EXEMPT FROM HAVING AN ACCESSIBLE FIRST FLOOR CAUSE IT'S A PREEXISTING BUILDING.
SO, SO WE'VE ALREADY COVERED THAT GROUND WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, BUT WE CAN, UM, OKAY.
GO BACK AND DO MORE IF NECESSARY TO, UH, SATISFY THIS BODY.
SO YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANY, ANY ACCESS TO THE FIRST FLOOR? NO.
OTHER QUESTIONS? I, WHEN WE, WHEN WE HAVE TWO FLAGS, THE US FLAG AND, AND A STATE FLAG TOGETHER, IT'S NORMAL TO HAVE THE US FLAG HIGHER.
WAS THERE A CONSIDERATION OF THAT? YES.
THE LIGHTING IS ACTUALLY TO COVER BOTH AND WE, WE WOULD, WE WOULD ACCOMPLISH THAT WITH DIFFERENT ANGLES.
WE HAVE THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? JUST A QUESTION THEN FOR MATT.
UH, DO YOU WANT TO REMOVE THAT RECOMMENDATION ABOUT VERIFYING ADA COMPLIANT ACCESS? YEAH, I, I WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT.
AND THE CONDITION FOR THE ADDITION AND THE RECOMMENDATION, RIGHT.
MR. CHAIR, JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE COMMENT THAT WAS OFFERED ABOUT THE FLAG POSITIONING WAS OFFERED BY MR. CUSHMAN, WHO I THINK IS ONE OF THE PRINCIPLES OF THE YES.
THE PROPERTY OWNER'S BUSINESS.
[00:30:01]
ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION THEN, OR MR. CHAIRMAN? I MOVE TO FIND THE AMENDMENT FOR 2 21 SOUTH FRONT STREET TO BE NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH NEW BERN'S CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTION 15 4 11 TO 15 4 29 IN NEW BURNS.
HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS OF FACT, PUBLIC AND OPEN SPACES 2.2 0.1, UTILITIES, 2.3 0.12 AND SIX.
LANDSCAPING 2.4, 0.34 AND SEVEN FENCES AND GARDEN WALLS, 2.5 0.123.
SIGNAGE EIGHT, 2.8 0.2 AND THREE DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1 0.1 MODIFICATIONS, 3.2 0.1 AND TWO ENTRANCES, 4.4 0.14 ROOFS, 4.5 0.4, DEX AND PATIOS, 4.6 0.2 AND THREE.
ACCESSIBILITY AND LIFE SAFETY, 4.7 0.2 AND THREE.
MASONRY, 5.1, 0.2 AND THREE WOOD, 5.2 0.2.
METALS, 5.3 0.3 AND FOUR, PAINT.
5.4, 0.1, TWO, THREE, AND FOUR.
FINDINGS OF FACT, THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN A DENSE FABRIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE PROPOSAL IS A PROJECT FOR REMOVAL OF THE FIRST FLOOR.
ADDITION, A NEW EYEBROW ROOF OVER THE REAR ENTRANCE, REPLACEMENT REAR DECK, EXTERIOR SI LIGHTING, SIGNAGE, BRICK FENCING, LANDSCAPING FOUNTAIN AND SITE WORK.
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 WE BELIEVE THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRESS WITH THE GUIDELINES.
DO YOU HAVE ANY CONDITIONS? ANY CONDITIONS? OKAY.
LIKE I'LL ADD THREE CON TWO CONDITIONS TO ADD TREES AND OTHER LANDSCAPING FEATURES AROUND THE PERIPHERY OF THE LOT.
AND SECONDLY, A DRAWING SHOWING THE SEPARATION OF THE DECK FROM THE EXISTING BUILDING BE SUBMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR THEIR OR HPC REVIEW.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? MOTION? SECOND.
BEEN SECONDED TO APPROVE THE, UH, PROJECT AS, AS DISCUSSED.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, STATE AYE.
IS THIS GENTLEMAN REPRESENTING, UH, THE, UH, YES.
OH, UM, WE IS, SO WE NEED A MOTION TO, UH, ISSUE A, UH, NO, NO, NO.
[4B. 305 North Ave. – to include a new infill house. This application was continued from the previous Regular Meeting. The HPC should decide on this application at this meeting.]
AVENUE.SO, UM, THIS IS THE, UH, APPLICATION FOR THIS ONE THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN JANUARY.
AND SO TONIGHT, UH, IS OUR LAST CHANCE TO ACT ON THIS UNDER CURRENT DEADLINE CONDITIONS JANUARY 4TH, UH, OR THEREABOUTS.
UH, AND SO, UM, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OPTIONS FOR THIS EVENING.
UH, ONE OF WHICH IS IF THE APPLICANT SO DESIRES, UM, THEY COULD OFFER A EXTENSION TO THE DEADLINE SINCE THE DEADLINE IS REALLY INCUMBENT ON YOU GUYS AND GENERALLY BENEFITS THE APPLICANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU DON'T DELAY THEIR PROJECT.
UH, SO, UM, IT'S IN MY OPINION AT LEAST APPROPRIATE THAT THEY, IF THEY SO DESIRE TO OFFER AN EXTENSION TO YOU, AND THEN YOU CAN DISCUSS WHETHER TO ACCEPT THAT OR NOT OR NEGOTIATE THE TIME PERIOD.
UM, SO I'D LIKE TO INVITE, UH, MR. FREEMAN FORWARD, FIRST OF ALL TO GET HIM SWORN IN.
[00:35:02]
AND THEN WE'LL HAVE HIM TALK ABOUT OKAY.FIRST OF ALL, I'LL HAVE TO HAVE YOU SWORN IN.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE? I DO PRINT.
I'M SORRY THIS TAKES LONGER EVERY YEAR.
AND I ALSO APOLOGIZE FOR BEING LATE.
I COULD HAVE BEEN HERE THE TIME.
SO, UM, MR. FREEMAN, UM, UH, YOU'RE AWARE OF THE SITUATION THAT THE HPC IS IN THIS EVENING WITH REGARD TO YOUR APPLICATION AND THE DEADLINE? YES.
UH, AGAIN, TO, TO SUMMARIZE WHAT ARE MEDIAN IN INTENT IS, IS TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING STRUCTURE.
AND, UM, AS PART OF THAT, WE'RE PROVIDING, UM, A, AN APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE.
UH, MATT HAS BEEN VERY GOOD AT PROVIDING ME INFORMATION, BUT IT'S HARD FOR ME TO COORDINATE WITH DESIGNERS TO INCORPORATE, UH, ALL THE ALTERATIONS OR, OR CERTAIN THINGS.
AND I DO HAVE ONE DESIGNER COMING IN, UH, FROM OUT OF STATE AND IS, IS RELATIVE.
BUT MY QUESTION WOULD BE IN THIS, UH, REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION, ARE THE DESIGNS OF THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE, UH, GONNA BE ACCEPTABLE IF THEY'RE NOT, UM, WITH A CERTIFIED OR SEALED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IN NORTH CAROLINA? THAT JUST AS FAR AS FAR AS WE'RE CONCERNED, YES.
THAT'S, THAT WAS ONE POINT CLARITY WE, WE WERE HOPING TO ACHIEVE.
THE OTHER IS, UH, ONE POINT ABOUT, UH, STAYING WITHIN THE DESIRED, UM, MINIMUMS AND MAXIMUMS OF THE BASE BLOOD IN, UH, ELEVATION.
WE'RE AT A POINT WHERE WE'RE KIND OF, UM, SATISFYING HISTORIC AND, UM, AESTHETIC, UH, IDEAS INTO WHAT FEMA IS SAYING MUST BE DONE.
AND, UM, THE POINT CAME UP OF, UH, DUCT WORK BELOW THE FIRST FLOOR FRAMING.
UM, SO IF WE'RE DOING, I JUST WANT TO GET THIS POINT STRAIGHT BEFORE PEOPLE MOVE FORWARD WITH MORE DESIGN, UH, THE CONCEPT.
SO, UH, WE ARE LOOKING AT NINE FEET ON A FEMA MAP AS OUR FLOOD ELEVATION.
WE HAVE TWO FEET OF, UH, REBOARD AND THEN WE ARE PERMITTED TO, UH, UTILIZE THAT ONE FOOT FOR DUCT WORK BEFORE THE FRAME OF THE FIRST DECK.
AND AM I, AM I FOLLOWING THAT PROPERLY? SO BASE BLOOD ELEVATION IS EXTENDED WITH ESSENTIALLY, UM, THREE FEET OF THREE FOUR.
WE WE'RE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO RULE ON THE PROJECT TONIGHT.
SO THE QUESTION IS DO YOU WANT AN EXTENSION? AND, AND I WOULD ASK YOU, IS THAT REALISTIC? ARE YOU GOING TO BE PREPARED IN 60 DAYS TO PRESENT THE PROJECT? WE, ANOTHER OPTION IS JUST TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION AND RESUBMIT AND COME BACK WHEN YOU HAVE A, A PLAN THAT YOU CAN TALK TO US WITH.
WE'VE BEEN A, WE'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL AS MATT SEEN COMING UP WITH SOME CONCEPTS.
NOW REMOVE THE GARAGE OUT OF THE UNDERNEATH OF THE HOME IDEA, UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S NOT CONGRUENT WITH OTHER STRUCTURES IN THAT DISTRICT.
BUT WE WE'RE ASKING NOW ALSO, WOULD WE WANT TO AUGMENT THE HOUSE PLAN WITH A DETACHED GARAGE PLAN IN THIS CONCEPT? IS THIS THE TIME TO DO THAT CAN BE, YES.
AT THE, I THINK, UM, MR. MR. CHAIR, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS SEVERAL QUESTIONS THAT PROBABLY ARE BEST FURNISHED TO STAFF.
PARTICULARLY, UM, THE INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND MR. SHELLEY
[00:40:01]
AND IF HE NEEDS ADDITIONAL TIME TO UNTANGLE SOME OF THOSE TECHNICAL ISSUES.I THINK THE GERMANE FACT FOR US TO DISCUSS AT THIS JUNCTURE IS HOW MUCH TIME IT WOULD TAKE YEAH.
UM, THE APPLICANT TO GET THOSE ANSWERS TO HIS SATISFACTION SO THAT HE CAN PRESENT A COMPLETE APPLICATION TO YOU ALL.
IS ARE, ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITHIN 60 DAYS? IF NOT, YEAH, SO I, I I WOULD RECOMMEND MORE THAN 60 DAYS, MORE LIKE 90 OR 120 DAYS PRIMARILY BECAUSE, UM, IF WE EXTENDED IT 60 DAYS, IT WOULD BE SEPTEMBER 1ST.
AND I WILL RECOMMEND THAT THEY ACT ON IT NOT IN AUGUST, BUT IN JULY BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN AUGUST MEETING JUST BECAUSE IT'S HURRICANE SEASON.
AND SO THAT WOULD THEN AT LEAST GIVE ONE MORE MONTH FOR YOUR PROJECT TO GET THROUGH DESIGN REVIEW AND THEN MAYBE MAKE SOME CHANGES AS NE AS MAY NECESSARY.
AND THEN MAYBE ONE MORE DESIGN REVIEW BEFORE WE WOULD BE, UM, RECOMMENDING, UH, FINAL ACTION ON IT COULD VERY WELL HAPPEN MM-HMM.
UM, OR EXCEPT, I'M SORRY, ALL IN JULY.
OTHERWISE WE'LL BE ASKING AGAIN OR YOU'LL BE ASKING AGAIN.
WELL, IF I AM TO MAKE IT OFFICIAL, THEN I'D, I'D REQUEST A 90 DAY EXTENSION.
CAN I ASK YOU QUESTION TWO? SURE.
NOW YOU'RE STILL UNDER A NOVEMBER 1ST, IS IT, OR ORDER TO DESTROY TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THAT COMES INTO PLAY AS WELL.
UM, AND JUST TO ENCOURAGE YOU, CUZ YOU'VE BEEN TO SOME DESIGN REVIEW MEETINGS, THE, THE, THE DRAWINGS ARE PRETTY DETAILED.
UH, THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT SKETCHES.
THEY HAVE DIMENSIONS, THEY HAVE A LOT OF DETAIL AS YOU'VE SEEN TONIGHT, UM MM-HMM.
WE, WE ORIGINALLY EMBARKED ON THIS THINKING THAT SOMETHING OUT OF A PLAN BOOK MIGHT HAVE BEEN ACCEPTABLE FOR JUST DEMOLITION PERMIT MM-HMM.
AND, UH, MATT'S CLARITY AND GUIDANCE HAS SHIFTED THINGS, BUT WE'RE STILL STAYING ON COURSE.
UM, GREAT RESOURCES IN THE CITY, SO PLEASE USE THEM AND, AND, UM, THEY HAVE REQUESTED TO BE ON THE, UH, JULY 5TH DESIGN REVIEW AGENDA.
SO, UM, THEY'RE PLANNING ON SENDING ME SOME PLANS BY NEXT WEEK.
SO, SO THE REQUEST WERE, WE'RE ALL CLEAR IS 90 FOR 90 DAYS FROM TODAY.
UH, WE, WE DON'T DO THE EXTENSIONS A WHOLE LOT.
IS THE PUBLIC HEARING THE PUBLIC RECORD SUFFICIENT, UH, AS A, AS AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN BOTH PARTIES? OR SHOULD THERE BE SOME KIND OF SIMPLE DOCUMENT THAT THE TWO PARTIES SIGNED TO CONFIRM THAT? YES, WE AGREE ON THIS.
I THINK THE MINUTES ARE GONNA REFLECT THAT THE APPLICANT CAME AND WAS SWORN AND MADE A SWORN STATEMENT TO YOU ALL THAT HE WAS REQUESTING AND WOULD AGREE TO BE BOUND BY A 90 DAY EXTENSION.
AND IF YOU ALL TAKE OFFICIAL ACTION IN THE FORM OF A MOTION SECOND AND AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, I THINK THAT'S SUFFICIENT FOR PURPOSES MOVING FORWARD.
SO I WOULD NEED A MOTION THEN TO GRANT A 90 DAY EXTENSION TO THIS APPLICATION.
EXCEPT, EXCEPT THE 90 DAY EX EXTENSION.
WOULD YOU AGREE YOU COULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GRANT A 90 DAY EXTENSION FOR THE APPLICATION FOR 3 0 5 NORTH AVENUE? YEAH.
TO GIVE THE APPLICANT ADDITIONAL TIME TO PRESENT A COMPLETE APPLICATION.
SHALL WE SECOND THAT? THAT WILL BE A MOTION.
WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE PROVIDE A THREE MONTH EXTENSION, UH, FOR THE APPLICATION FOR 3 0 5, UH, NORTH AVENUE, UH, IN ORDER TO, UH, PROVIDE TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO, UH, PRESENT PLANS, UH, AND, UH, GET THIS THING TO THE FINISH LINE.
SO A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION? YES.
WE GRANT A THREE MONTH WAS YOUR TERMINOLOGY, UH, MOTION TO, UH, TO
[00:45:01]
EXTEND THIS ALL IN FAVOR, STATE AYE.ALL BUSINESS, NO GENERAL PUBLIC.
DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY COMMENTS? NO.
[7A. City Land Use Ordinance Section 15-416. Discuss and consider recommending changes to this section of the City Code.]
BUSINESS IS THE CITY LAND ORDINANCE SECTION 15 4 16.WE DISCUSSED THIS BRIEFLY AT THE WORK SESSION.
WE DID NOT HAVE A, UH, A COPY OF THE WORDING SUGGESTED, UH, WE DO NOW, AND MATT HAS SOME BULLET POINTS TO DISCUSS OF WHAT IT MEANS.
SO, UH, ON YOUR SCREENS RIGHT NOW IS THE FULL TEXT OF THE AMENDMENT AS DRAFTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
UM, AND ESSENTIALLY IT RESTORES, UH, TWO SECTIONS BACK INTO THE ORDINANCE OF 15, 4 16 AND 15 4 17, AND THEN ALSO REVISES FOUR 16 IN THE PROCESS.
AND SO THE REVISION IS ALSO NOW ON YOUR SCREEN, PARTICULARLY FOR SUBSECTION A.
UM, IT ELIMINATES THE, UH, FIRST OF ALL, UH, THE WORD CONTRIBUTING AND SAME SIDE AND CHANGES THAT TO BOTH SIDES OF THE BLOCK.
SO FOR THE FRONT YARD SETBACKS, THEY WOULD BE, UH, STRUCTURES WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE LOCATED WITHIN A ZONE ESTABLISHED BY THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM SETBACKS OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BLOCK UNDER CONSIDERATION AS OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION.
UH, AND THIS IS ONLY IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, UH, AND THEN THE REST OF THE, ALL THE LANGUAGE HAS BEEN DELETED.
UM, SO, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE REST HAS BEEN UNCHANGED AND EVEN FOUR 17 IS TO BE REINSERTED WITHOUT CHANGES.
SO I PROVIDED FOR YOU THE, UH, STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION ON THIS, THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT WITH BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND, UH, THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE COMMISSION VOTE TO RECOMMEND THE CHANGES TO SECTION 15 4 16 AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND TO RE ESTATE SECTION 15 4 17 AS IT WAS PRIOR TO DECEMBER, 2022.
SO TO BE CLEAR HERE, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS RECOMMENDING THIS, WE'RE NOT ENACTING IT'S CORRECT.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING IT TO THE ALTMAN.
THE HPC HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ENACT TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE, UM, CITY CODE.
SO ARE, ARE THERE QUESTIONS? SEVERAL.
SO THIS IS SAYING THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK ON THIS SIDE AND THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT YOU HAVE AND BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET THERE TOO.
AND BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET AND ACROSS THE STREET.
AND SAME AND DECIDE WHAT'S THE SHORTEST AND WHAT'S THE LONGEST AND HAS TO BE SOMEWHERE RIGHT IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO.
THE SHORTEST AND LONGEST OF ALL THE BUILDINGS ON THAT STREET OF ALL THE BUILDINGS ON THAT STREET.
NOT JUST CONTRIBUTING, NOT JUST ONE SIDE AND THE OTHER SIDE, BUT ALL THE BUILDINGS ON THIS SIDE AND ALL THE BUILDINGS ON THAT STREET.
SO THAT ANYONE WHO WOULD COME BEFORE US YES.
CAUSE YOU KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOMEBODY DO THAT.
SO THEN THE ZONING ESTABLISHES THIS ZONE, THIS AREA, THIS RANGE ON IN WHICH, UH, BUILDINGS ARE ALLOWED BY ZONING TO BE LOCATED.
IT WOULD THEN BE UP TO YOU TO USE THE GUIDELINES TO DECIDE IF THE PROPOSED LOCATION IS APPROPRIATE ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES, ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF IT HAS TO BE BETWEEN THIS AND THAT, CORRECT? RIGHT, RIGHT.
SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY INCREASING THE RANGE, UH, THAT, UH, A BUILDING CAN BE LOCATED AND THEREBY, UM, INCREASES THE, UM, THE PURVIEW, YOUR PURVIEW, UM, FOR THE LOCATION OF BUILDINGS.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU BOTH USED THE TERM STREET, BUT IT'S BLOCK? THAT'S CORRECT.
WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? BOTH SIDES OF THE BLOCK.
YOU USED THE TERM STREET, BUT IT'S JUST THAT BLOCK.
ONLY THAT ONE BLOCK ON THE STREET ON SIDE, THAT SIDE, YEAH.
NOT THE FULL LENGTH OF THE STREET BLOCKS AND BLOCKS.
NO, BUT THE STREET IN, IN THE BLOCK WHERE THE HOUSE IS BLOCKED OFF.
SO HOW DOES, HOW DOES THE ELEVATION PLAY INTO THIS? THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ELEVATION.
IT ONLY HAS TO DO WITH THE SETBACK.
[00:50:01]
MATT CLARIFIED FOR ME IS THAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR LIKELY IS GOING TO SAY IT HAS TO BE BETWEEN 17 AND 12 FEET, BUT WE COULD CHOOSE A NUMBER THERE.YEAH, RIGHT WITHIN THAT RANGE.
THE APPLICANT MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT PROPOSAL.
SO THE ZONING MAN IS GONNA PUT THAT IN WRITING.
WHAT IS THE, THIS SIDE AND THIS SIDE WHEN HE LOOKS AT THE HOUSE FOR ZONING IN YOUR ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REPORT, I IMAGINE GOING FORWARD, IF THIS ISSUE IS APPROPRIATE, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WILL GIVE YOU THAT RANGE ON THAT DOCUMENT THAT YOU ROUTINELY SEE IN YOUR PACKET.
SO THAT LAST SENTENCE OF ZONING SECTOR WILL, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WILL INDICATE THAT RANGE ON THE ZONING AND INSPECTION REPORT THAT'S ROUTINELY INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.
SO LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, HERE ON THIS ONE, WE, UH, AT THE TOP HERE, THERE ARE A BUNCH OF BOXES MM-HMM.
AND SO, UM, IT INCLUDES THINGS LIKE AVERAGE FOR THE FRONT SETBACK THAT WOULD NOW HAVE TO INDICATE THE RANGE.
BUT ONLY IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
ONLY IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
YEAH, I GUESS, I GUESS THE, THE ONE PLACE, UM, TO THINK ABOUT THIS, AND I DON'T THINK WE WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, IS IF YOU'RE HEADING NORTH ON NATIONAL AVENUE, THE HOUSES ON THE RIGHT SIDE OR CLOSER TO THE STREET ON THE LEFT SIDE, WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY OF, AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S AT LEAST ONE EMPTY LIGHT ON THE NORTH ON, ON THE WEST SIDE OF NATIONAL AVENUE.
WHEN THE HOUSES ARE SET FURTHER BACK, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SAY, OKAY, IT NEEDS TO BE ALIGNED WITH THE OTHER HOUSES.
HE WOULD USE YOUR GUIDELINES RELATED TO THE PLACEMENT OF STRUCTURES TO GUIDE YOUR CONVERSATION TO MAKE THE APPROPRIATE FINDINGS.
ALSO, SOME LOTS ARE DIFFERENT DEPTHS AND SO PLACEMENT ON A VERY DEEP LOT VERSUS PLACEMENT ON A VERY LIMITED DEPTH LOT COULD LOOK A LOT DIFFERENT FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I, I CAN THINK ON MY BLOCK, THERE'S, THERE'S LOTS TWICE AS DEEP AS OTHERS.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN HAVE A RULE FOR EVERY SINGLE SCENARIO WE'RE FACING YEAH.
BUT IT, IT STILL IS, IT'S STILL, THIS STILL GIVES US A WIDE RANGE THOUGH, OF CHOICES FOR ANY PARTICULAR SITUATION, ASSUMING THAT'S A LOT TO HAVE VARIANCES RIGHT.
THE MOTION WOULD BE TORE, RECOMMEND THE CHANGES TO SECTION 15, UM, 16 AS PREPARED TO THE CITY ATTORNEY BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, EXCUSE ME.
AND TO REINSTATE SECTION 15 4 17 AS IT WAS PRIOR TO DECEMBER, 2022.
SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION.
YOU CAN READ THAT ON THE SCREEN.
UM, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT, UM, WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL, UH, TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN, UH, FOR CHANGES TO SECTION 15 DASH FOUR 16 AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND ALSO REINSTATE SECTION 15 DASH FOUR 17, UH, AS IT WAS PRIOR TO DECEMBER OF 2022.
WE APPROVE THE MOTION AS STATED.
[8. HPC Administrator’s Report: A. Report on CoAs Issued 05/04/2023 – 06/07/2023 MAJORS: 301 Hancock St. – porch renovations 302 Avenue A – new garage 521 Hancock St. – rear porches enclosure MINORS: 203 S. Front St. – access ramp 316 S. Front St. – amendment for light fixtures 411 Broad St. – awning, sign, lighting 412 Pollock St. – repointing 501 George St. – hvac platform & screening 609 New St. – tree replacement 1305 National Ave. – tree replacement About 10 pending, plus about 15 pending info from applicants B. Report on CoA Extensions Issued since the Prior Regular Meeting: 101 King St. – extension of CoAs for demolition and redevelopment to 6/24/2024 C. Other Items and Updates by the Administrator ]
ANY PARTICULAR, UH, SIGNIFICANT ITEM IN YOUR REPORT THAT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS? UH, NO.[9. Commissioners’ Comments]
ANY COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? UH, JUST ONE.I BELIEVE THIS IS RUTH'S LAST, UH, MEETING.
SHE HAS, SHE HAS BEEN ON THE COMMISSION FOR SIX YEARS.
IN FACT, I THINK YOU STARTED, UH, AS I WAS ROLLING OFF AS CHAIR AND I ACTUALLY DID YOUR TRAINING, SO YES, THAT'S RIGHT.
I'D LIKE TO, UH, COMMEND RUTH FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR HER HARD WORK.
SHE WAS CHAIRMAN, UH, OF THIS COMMISSION IN THE PAST.
UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND YOUR
[00:55:01]
HARD WORK OVER, UH, QUITE A NUMBER OF YEARS TO YEAH.TO TRY TO, UH, HELP US PROTECT THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND KEEP THEM INTACT.
I, I APPRECIATE IT ALL THAT TIME AND, AND WORK TO SAVE, UH, ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT MY FATHER STARTED, UH, WHEN HE WAS MAYOR.
SO, UH, IT'S REALLY BEEN A LABOR OF LOVE AND A PRIVILEGE TO ME TO CARRY ON WITH WHAT HE STARTED.
WANNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN? OH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION.