[00:00:02]
INTERESTING.[1. OPENING OF MEETING WITH ROLL CALL]
IT'S FIVE 30.YOU CALLED ORDER THE JANUARY MEETING OF THE NEW BERN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS WE DO HAVE A PRESENTATION.
YOU WANNA DO A ROLL CALL OPENING? EXCUSE ME.
[2. PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION - TRIPP EURE]
A CER PRESENTATION OF A C CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TONIGHT FOR TRIP.YOUR AND I'VE SERVED BOTH MY TERMS WITH TRIP AND I DO HAVE TO SAY THAT HE'S JUST RECENTLY ENDED HIS MOST RECENT TERM ON THE HPC.
IT'S DIFFICULT TO CONVEY HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THE HPC AND TO ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND HPC COMMISSIONERS WHO HAVE BENEFITED FROM HIS INSIGHT AND SUGGESTIONS.
AS AN ARCHITECT AND STRONG DEFENDER OF THE CHARACTER OF NEW BERN'S HISTORIC DISTRICTS, WE SINCERELY APPRECIATED.
WE ALSO RECOGNIZE HIS AND HIS FIRM'S SKILL IN DESIGNING THE AWARD-WINNING ADDITION TO THE HALL, CITY HALL THROUGH WHICH WE ENTERED.
IF YOU HAD COME UP, YOU GONNA SAY SOMETHING? JIM? I'M LOOKING FOR NEW PR MAN THINGS ABOUT ME.
ARE YOU AVAILABLE?
IT'S BEEN A PRIVILEGE ILL IN SO IT'S A ENJOYED SERVING WITH YOU ALL, OBVIOUSLY.
AND, UH, WE, WE'VE SPENT SOME TIME TOGETHER.
I, I THINK ALL OF US CAN APPRECIATE HOW THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS CONTRIBUTE TO THE, UH, IDENTITY OF THE CITY OF NEW BERN.
YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S A DRIVER OF TOURISM, WHICH IS A DRIVER OF OUR LOCAL ECONOMY.
UM, WE'VE GOT A STRONG TAX BASE AND THE WAY I SEE IT, THAT HELPS PAY FOR SOME OF THE MAINTENANCE WE NEED TO DO THESE HISTORIC BUILDINGS PRESERVED.
I'M SO PLEASED THAT I, ALRIGHT, WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE RECOGNITION.
I THINK I'M SUPPOSED TO DO THIS AND NOW SMILE THIS.
NO, I DON'T THINK THAT'S LEVEL.
CAN WE GET A LEVEL ON THAT PICTURE FOR YOU?
ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA? HEARING NONE.
WE'LL MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[4. CONSENT AGENDA]
WE HAVE MINUTES TONIGHT FROM, I'LL READ OFF THE LIST.I, I'LL MAKE THAT AS PART OF THE MOTION.
UH, MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, UM, CONSISTING OF A NUMBER OF MEETING MINUTES, INCLUDING JULY 20TH, 2022, AUGUST 17TH, 2022, SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2022, AND NOVEMBER 19TH, 2025, ALL REGULAR MEETINGS AND TWO SPECIAL MEETINGS.
UM, NOVEMBER 6TH AND NOVEMBER 10TH, 2025.
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED.
[5.A. HEARINGS: INTRODUCTION SWEARING-IN SUMMARY OF PROCESS 1. Introduction of Hearings and Rules of Procedure 2. Swearing-In of Speakers 3. Summary of the Hearing Process]
THE HEARINGS ON CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS.WE WILL START WITH, UH, THE INTRODUCTION OF WHAT WE DO AS PART OF THESE HEARINGS.
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IS A PUBLIC COMMISSION APPOINTED BY THE CITY OF NEW BERN'S.
BOARD OF ALMOND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESERVING AND SAFEGUARDING NEW BERN'S, LOCALLY DE DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICTS, BOTH DOWNTOWN AND RIVERSIDE, BASED ON US DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR STANDARDS, STATE STATUTES, CITY ORDINANCES, AND NEW BERN'S HISTORIC DISTRICT STANDARDS.
TWO OF THE MAJOR TESTS THAT THE HPC INCLUDE APPLYING APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND PREVENTING DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC DRUG STRUCTURES DUE TO NEGLECT.
THE HPC HOLDS QUADRANT JUDICIAL HEARINGS ON AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THE COMMISSION HERE IS SWORN TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, BY PARTIES WHO RECEIVE NOTICE OF THE HEARING AND BY OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAVE RELEVANT EVIDENCE OR DIRECTLY ARE DIRECTLY
[00:05:01]
AFFECTED BY THE APPLICATION.THE COMMISSION CANNOT CONSIDER COMMENTS BASED ON PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES, HEARSAY OR PERSONAL OPINION, THAT CANNOT BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO SPECIFIC HISTORIC DISTRICT STANDARDS.
LIKEWISE, COMMISSIONERS SHALL REFRAIN FROM STATING PERSONAL OPINION, PERSONAL LIKES, OR DISLIKES, OR HEARSAY DURING A HEARING.
THE COMMISSION'S DECISION ON APPLICATION IS BASED SOLELY ON TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT A HEARING THAT SPECIFICALLY RELATES TO HISTORIC DISTRICT STANDARDS.
MATT, IF YOU WOULD SWEAR IN ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO SPEAK TONIGHT, LOOKS LIKE ALL FOUR.
UH, YOU DO, YOU DO THE SWEARING.
AND DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE BEST OF YOUR ABILITY? I DO.
AND JUST SIGN IT IF YOU HAVE NOT.
OR READ PLEASE AN ADDRESS WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, I'LL START.
THE SUMMARY OF HOW WE GO THROUGH AN APPLICATION IS FIRST, THE HBC ADMINISTRATOR PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION THE APPLICANT, OR THE REPRESENTATIVES PRESENTS THE APPLICATION.
PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WHO RECEIVE NOTICE OF THE HEARING CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.
REBUTTAL IS ALLOWED BY THE APPLICANT AND BY PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS WHO RECEIVE NOTICE.
OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAVE RELEVANT INFORMATION AND WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.
THE HBC ADMINISTRATOR THEN PRESENTS THE STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE APPLICANT HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE FINAL COMMENTS ON THEIR APPLICATION.
THEN THE COMMISSIONERS DISCUSS THE EVIDENCE AND MAY ASK FOR CLARIFICATION FROM THE APPLICANT OR PRESENTERS.
THE CHAIRMAN CALLS FOR A MOTION TO PURDUE, APPROVE OR DENY THE APPLICATION WITH STATED FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE MOTION IS DISCUSSED BY THE COMMISSION AND THEN THE CHAIRMAN CALLS FOR A VOTE ON THE MOTION BY THE COMMISSION.
A COA CAN BE APPROVED, APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS OR DECLINED.
[5.B. 206 Craven St. - to include staining existing brick in all AVCs.]
THE FIRST ONE? YES, WE ARE.SO WE'LL START WITH 2 0 6 CRAVEN STREET, 2 0 6 CRAVEN STREET.
I HAVE TO GO DOWN QUITE A BIT.
SO THIS IS THE, UH, APPLICATION FOR TWO OF THE PROJECT AT 2 0 6 CRAVEN STREET.
UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER IS H AND W LAND HOLDINGS, LLC, UH, AND THEY'VE PROVIDED THEIR INFORMATION THERE.
THE DESCRIPTION OF PROP PROPOSED WORK IS EXTERIOR STAIN ON BRICK MASON RESURFACES FOR PROPERTY PRESERVATION, AESTHETIC INTEGRITY AND UNIFORMITY DUE TO PREVIOUS REPAIRS.
THEY'VE ALSO LISTED THE APPLICABLE HISTORIC DISTRICT STANDARDS AND, UH, ALSO THE MATERIALS TO BE USED.
AND THEY'VE CHECKED OFF THE APPROPRIATE BOXES AND THE OWNER HAS SIGNED THE APPLICATION.
UM, AND AT, IN THE APPLICATION THEY INCLUDED A PHOTO, KIND OF PRE, UM, APPLICATION PHOTO HERE, AND THEN A POST APPLICATION PHOTO HERE.
AND WE HAVE OUR ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REVIEW AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION WHERE, UH, FOR THIS PROJECT WHERE, UH, IT'S BEEN INDICATED ZONING PERMIT'S NOT REQUIRED, AND CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR, UH, WILL NOT REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THIS WORK.
OKAY, THEN, UM, THERE'S QUITE A LOT OF INFORMATION IN HERE, UH, THAT WE WENT THROUGH IN THE DESIGN REVIEW.
AND I'LL JUST BREEZE THROUGH THIS FOR US BECAUSE WE'VE ALL DISCUSSED THIS QUITE AT QUITE LENGTH.
AND THE DESIGN REVIEW, THESE WERE SOME OF THE EMAILS THAT, UH, LED TO THE DECISION TO USE THAT PRODUCT FROM THE, UH, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE.
UH, THEN THEY PROVIDED THE INFORMATION, UH, THE, THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE MATERIAL, THE STAIN THAT WAS USED, AND YOU CAN SEE ALL THAT THERE.
THEY PROVIDED, UM, COLOR SWATCH AND ANOTHER, UH,
[00:10:01]
DESCRIPTION HERE ON THE LEFT OF, UH, UH, COORDINATES WITH THE PREVIOUS DESCRIPTION.STAFF HAD ALSO PROVIDED SOME PHOTOGRAPHS AT THE TIME OF DISCOVERY, UH, AND USED THE PHOTOGRAPH FROM STREET VIEW, UH, AS A, AS A BEFORE PHOTO.
AND THEN, UM, AND THESE WERE SOME OF THE CLOSEUPS FROM THESE, UH, SHOWING THE, UM, CHARACTERISTICS OF THE, OF THE BRICK, UH, BEFOREHAND.
THESE WERE FROM 2019, HOWEVER, AND EVEN MORE UP.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE, UH, PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT, IT SEEMS THE, UH, BRICK WAS NOT REALLY THAT HOMOGENOUS AND SOME MORE UP CLOSE PHOTOGRAPHS.
THEN, UH, ON OCTOBER 1ST, UH, WHEN IT WAS DISCOVERED, THIS WAS THE CONDITION OF THE STAIN.
IT WAS A WET CONDITION, HAD JUST BEEN APPLIED.
IN FACT, UH, THEY WERE JUST CLIMBING OFF THE LADDERS, FINISHING JUST ABOUT FINISHING THE ENTIRE, UH, PROJECT.
AND YOU CAN SEE, UM, THE APPEARANCE OF THE BUILDING AT THAT TIME.
AND IT WENT AROUND TO THE BACKSIDE AS WELL.
UM, IT WAS, UH, REPORTED TO ME THAT, UH, THE APPEARANCE CHANGED, UH, SINCE IT'S BEEN WET.
AND SO YESTERDAY I WENT OUT AND TOOK SOME PHOTOGRAPHS.
AND SO I'M PROVIDING YOU THOSE HERE.
UM, SO YOU CAN SEE PERHAPS, UH, SOME CHANGE.
I ALSO TOOK, UH, CLOSER UP PHOTOS THAN BEFORE.
THEY SHOULDA PAINTED ALL PLACE.
YOU CAN SEE HOW, UH, THE PAINT, UM, KIND OF, UM, HOMOGENIZES THE STAIN.
UH, AND, UH, HOMOGENIZES, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE, UH, UH, REPAIRS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE OVER TIME, UH, THIS, UH, BEING CLOSEUP OF, UH, THE APPEARANCE YESTERDAY LOOKS LIKE.
AND THEN, UM, UH, I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE INTERESTING OR RELEVANT TO SEE THE COMPARISON WITH A, UM, SOME, I WOULD SAY UN UH, STAINED BRICK ON THE NEIGHBORING BUILDING, ALBEIT IT'S DIFFERENT COLOR AND DIFFERENT TEXTURE AND ALL OF THAT.
BUT JUST AS, UH, PERHAPS, UH, INFORMATIVE TO THE DISCUSSION AND THERE YOU SEE THEM SIDE BY SIDE AT A DISTANCE.
WE ALSO, UH, IN THE DESIGN REVIEW WENT THROUGH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS, UM, PUBLICATIONS, UH, ABOUT REHABILITATIONS.
UM, UM, THEY DID NOT HAVE ANY REFERENCE TO STAIN, BUT REFERENCE TO PAINT, UH, BUT ALSO SOME GENERALITIES ABOUT, UM, THE CHARACTER OF A BRICK, UH, WALL.
WE WENT THROUGH ALL OF THESE KEEP GOING, SUCH AS THIS SECTION HERE, BUT MOST OF THE DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT ACTUALLY THE MORTAR AND REPOINTING, SUCH AS THIS PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING A VERY BAD REPOINTING JOB HAPPENING.
UM, SO, UM, THEN, UH, WE HAVE OUR, UM, STAFF REPORT, UH, WHEN YOU'RE READY.
DID THE APPLICANT HAVE ANY COMMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? THAT'S THIS.
I THINK THIS, THIS, FOR THOSE LISTENING, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNUSUAL SITUATION IF I CAN CHARACTERIZE IT A LITTLE BIT.
THAT WE HAVE SOMETIMES SOUGHT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT PRESERVATION PRACTICES AND TECHNOLOGY AND THE PRESERVATION BRIEFS ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE.
HERE, THE OWNER WAS ATTEMPTING TO CLARIFY CURRENT REQUIREMENTS FOR TAX CREDITS AND PRESERVATION.
AND DIRECTLY SOUGHT HELP FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ON PROJECT CONFORMANCE.
AS A RESULT, WE HAVE THESE WRITTEN OPINIONS AND GUIDANCE THAT THEY SENT TO YOU,
[00:15:01]
UH, UNDER THEIR COVER, AND YOU FULLY EXPLAINED WHAT YOU WERE DOING AND THEY CAME BACK WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATION OF, OF WHAT YOU DID.SO THAT'S A, A DIFFERENT BACKGROUND THAN WE TYPICALLY HAVE ABOUT, I WANT TO PAINT MY PROPERTY.
AND THEY SPECIFICALLY POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS NOT A WATERPROOFING, UH, COATING.
AND SO WITH THAT, UH,
UH, LET, LET'S HEAR YOUR STAFF REPORT.
I DID WANT TO, WELL, UH, UM, LET'S SEE.
DO YOU GET COMMENTS FROM THE, FROM PROPONENTS OPPONENTS YET AT THIS POINT? ARE THERE ANY PROPONENTS OR OPPONENTS WHO CHOOSE, WHO HAVE RECEIVED NOTICE? WHO WOULD WISH TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE.
UH, SO FOR THE, UH, OUR STAFF REPORT FOR THIS PROJECT, FOR THE APPLICANT, H AND W LAND HOLDINGS, LLC, THE PROJECT ADDRESS 2 0 6 CRAVEN STREET, THE HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME IS THE NEWBURN IRONWORKS AND SUPPLY COMPANY.
IT IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
AND THE NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY DESCRIPTION, UH, SIMPLY HAS IT AS A TWO STORIES BRICK, THREE BAYS WIDE AND SEGMENTAL ARCHED WINDOWS AND PANELIZED BREEZE.
THE SAND BACK DESCRIPTION, UM, THAT SEEMED TO BE AT LEAST INTERESTING TO, UH, UH, DISCOVER IT AN EXCERPT, UH, SECTION AS THE YOUNG COMPANY EXPANDED.
THIS TWO STORY BRICK COMMERCIAL BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED BY 1908 TO HOUSE THEIR NEW MILL SUPPLY OPERATIONS AT THE FIRST LEVEL OF THE FACADE.
BRICK PILLARS GIVEN A RUST EFFECT BY BANDS OF ROCK FACED LIMESTONE, DIVIDE THE STOREFRONT INTO THREE BAYS WITH THE DISPLAY WINDOWS FLANKING CENTRAL DOUBLE ENTRANCE DOORS.
THE SECOND SECOND STORY HAS THREE PAIRED WINDOWS.
ALL SEGMENTALLY ARCHED AND THE ORIGINAL MULTI PANE SASH HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY THE PRESENT.
ONE OVER ONE UNITS AND ABOVE IS A PANELIZED FREEZE AND A SIMILARLY PANEL AND CORDAL PARAPET.
UH, SO THE PROJECT FOR 2 0 6 CRAVEN STREET IS TO INCLUDE STAINING EXISTING BRICK IN ALL ABCS.
AND THIS IS AN AFTER THE FACT APPLICATION.
SO TO FACILITATE DISCUSSION AND EMOTION, STAFF PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS, FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE GUIDELINES THAT MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION.
UH, I'M GONNA READ THESE THROUGH, UH, UNCHARACTERISTICALLY JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME SIMILARITIES AND SOME DIFFERENCES AMONG THEM.
UH, THIS ONE IS AVOID CREATING A FALSE SENSE OF HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT MODIFICATIONS 3.2 0.2 MODIFICATIONS TO A STRUCTURE SHOULD NOT CONCEAL DAMAGE OR REMOVE SIGNIFICANT DESIGN COMPONENTS OR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.
IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO INTRODUCE FEATURES AND DETAILS THAT WILL CREATE A FALSE SENSE OF HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT WALLS.
ADHERE TO THE GUIDELINES FOR RETENTION OF HISTORIC FABRIC WHEN ALTERING WALL COMPONENTS 4.2 0.4, INCORPORATE WOOD TRIMS AND ARTICULATE MASONRY APPROPRIATE FOR THE APP, APPROPRIATE FOR THE APPLICATION MASONRY.
ADHERE TO THE GUIDELINES FOR RETENTION OF HISTORIC FABRIC WHEN ALTERING MASONRY MATERIALS, 5.1 0.3, THE SIZE, COLOR, TEXTURE, AND BOND OR PATTERN OF MASONRY AND MORTAR CREATES THE INTENDED FINISHED APPEARANCE.
IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TO PAINT MASONRY THAT HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY PAINTED PAINT.
5.4 0.2, SELECT PAINT AND SEALANT COATINGS THAT ARE HARMONIOUS WITH ADJOINING WORK.
IN GENERAL, NEW MATERIAL SHALL BE A COMPATIBLE FORMULATION WITH A SUBSTRATE OF APPLICATION 5.4 0.6.
IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO APPLY PAINT, WATER, REPELLENT OR SEALANT COATINGS TO UNPAINTED SURFACES SUCH AS MASONRY, STONE, COPPER, AND BRONZE.
CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5.5 0.2, USE CONTEMPORARY AND NON-TRADITIONAL MATERIALS IN TRADITIONAL WAYS.
APPLY MATERIALS IN A TRADITIONAL MANNER THAT CONVEYS THE SAME VISUAL APPEARANCE AS HISTORIC MATERIALS.
CONTEMPORARY AND NON-TRADITIONAL MATERIAL SHOULD CONVEY APPROPRIATE HISTORIC MATERIAL, MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS AND WILL BE EVALUATED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS FOR APPEARANCE, DIMENSION, TEXTURE, COLOR, SHEEN, VISUAL WEIGHT, AND SIMILAR CHARACTERISTICS.
SO, STATEMENTS OF REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION IN STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE, THE APPLICATION IS FOR STAINING EXISTING BREAK IN ALL ABCS IN THE DENSE FABRIC DEVELOPMENT
[00:20:01]
PATTERN.THE USE OF THE STAIN, NOT A PAINT, WAS NOT TO ADDRESS ANY WATER INFILTRATION OR PENETRATION ISSUES, BUT RATHER AS AN AESTHETIC MEASURE SUGGESTED BY THE STAFF, THE US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, TO ADDRESS A REQUIRED ALTERATION TO BETTER MATCH THE HOMOGENOUS APPEARANCE THAT WAS PRESENT AT THE START OF A PROJECT.
THREE, THE STAIN CREATES AN OPAQUE, FULLY HOMOGENOUS COLOR OVER A SURFACE THAT WAS NEVER COMPLETELY HOMOGENOUS AND THEREFORE PERMANENTLY CONCEALS A SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTIC OF THE HISTORIC BRICK WALLS AND INTRODUCES A FALSE SENSE OF HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT.
FOUR, THE PROPOSED MATERIAL EITHER MEETS OR DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS.
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND SIX, THE PROJECT EITHER IS NOT OR IS INCONGRUOUS WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS.
AND THE HPC MAY WANT TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ANY REVISIONS TO THE APPLICATION ACCORDING TO THE CHANGES AGREED UPON AT THE HEARING SHOULD BE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT TO THE HPC STAFF FOR APPROVAL BY STAFF OR THE HPC.
ACCORDING TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS, UH, IF NOT APPROVED, THE HPC MAY WANT TO STATE THE RECOGNITION THAT THE VIOLATING MATERIAL CANNOT BE REMOVED WITHOUT DAMAGING THE HISTORIC MATERIAL AND THEREFORE IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE REMOVED.
ALSO, THE HPC MAY WANT TO CLEARLY STATE THAT NO OTHER USE OF STAIN ON MASONRY WILL BE APPROVED AND STATE THE REASONS WHY.
THAT'S THE END OF OUR STAFF REPORT.
AND DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? COMMISSIONERS? ANY COMMENTS? I ALWAYS DO.
I I THINK WE HAVE AN INTERESTING SITUATION HERE.
WE'VE GOT A COA FOR AN APPLICATION OF STAYING TO A HISTORIC BRICK STRUCTURE.
YOU KNOW, ON ONE HAND OUR STANDARD, SPECIFICALLY 5.1 0.3, STATE THAT IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO PAINT PREVIOUSLY UNLESS IT'S PAID PREVIOUSLY PAINTED, UM, BRICK AND MASONRY.
UM, AND HAVE WE, AS, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED BEFORE, UM, A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AT PAINTING BRICKS AS A WAY TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION.
UM, AND THEN, AND WE KNOW THAT'S NOT A GOOD SOLUTION.
NOT ONLY DOES IT NOT GENERALLY WORK, BUT IT ALSO CAN END UP DEGRADING THE BRICK OVER TIME.
NOW, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GUIDANCE ON THIS MATTER SET STATES THAT YOU SHOULD NOT PAINT OR PUT COATINGS ON, LIKE STUCCO OR OTHER WATER SEALERS OVER HISTORIC BRICKS FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT CAN LEAD TO DEGRADATION OF, OF THE BRICKS.
HOWEVER, ON THIS HAND, WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT SITUATION.
UM, THE APPLICATION IS STAIN, UM, NOT PAINT, WHICH IS DIFFERENT QUALITIES SUCH AS WATER, VA, OR PERMEABILITY.
MOREOVER, UM, THE APPLICATION OF THE STAIN AS DOCUMENTED IN THE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE, FROM THE PEOPLE WHO WERE DOING THE FEDERAL TAX EXPERTS, THEY NOT ONLY RECOMMENDED, THEY ALMOST REQUIRED THAT THIS, UH, APPLICATION OF THIS PRODUCT BE DONE NOT TO PROVIDE WATER, UH, PROTECTION FROM WATER INTRUSION, BUT REALLY MORE FOR THE APPEARANCE THAT, UM, HOMOGENEOUS HOMOGENOUS.
UH, WE, WE, I I KNOW WE'VE DISCUSSED THE, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE, HOW TO PRONOUNCE THAT.
UM, AND OF COURSE, WE ALL SUPPLY, UH, WE ALL SUPPORT THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM.
SO IN OUR DESIGN REVIEW, AND I KNOW ON OUR OWN, WE'VE ALL REVIEWED THE, THE, THE STANDARDS, THE INFORMATION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND THE PARK SERVICE, UM, THE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM.
AND WE'VE ALSO LOOKED AT ALL OF THE IMMATERIAL FROM THE, FROM THE PRODUCT SUPPLIER.
IT HAS DIFFERENT QUALITIES, IT HAS DIFFERENT USES AND HAS, HAS BEEN POINTED OUT, UM, BY OTHERS.
UM, AS AN HPC THROUGH OUR STANDARDS AND OUR PROCEDURES, WE'RE THE DECISION MAKING ENTITY.
WE'RE NOT RELYING ON THE FEDERAL, WE'RE SHIPPO TO, TO MAKE THIS CALL.
AND, UM, THE HPC WAS REALLY NOT BROUGHT INTO, UM, THIS MATTER WHEN IT WAS TALKED ABOUT FROM THE, THE, THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM, UM, UNTIL LATER ON IN THE PROCESS.
AND I, I DON'T THINK ANY OF US YET HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT THAT LONG-TERM IMPLICATION OF USING STAIN ON THESE HISTORIC BRICKS AND THE MORTAR THAT, ALONG WITH THE BRICKS.
SO THAT HASN'T REALLY BEEN DOCUMENTED.
NOW, ONE THING I DO, UM, TAKE SOME DIFFERENCE TO ON THE STAFF REPORT.
I REALLY DON'T THINK THIS IS A MATTER OF
[00:25:01]
CREATING A FALSE SENSE OF HISTORY AS, AS, AS MENTIONED.I, I THINK SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU POINTED OUT, MATTHEW, ARE, ARE GOOD.
I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S REALLY THE CASE.
I THINK THIS IS REALLY A MATTER OF DETERMINE, UM, THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THIS PRODUCT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT PROVIDE A DEGRADATION OF HISTORIC, UM, FA FABRIC OF A HISTORIC.
SO THIS IS KIND OF WHAT I'M THINKING.
THIS IS WHAT I THINK IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE, FOR US AS AN HPC TO DO I THINK WE SHOULD DENY COAI THINK THAT WE SHOULD CORRESPOND AND, AND GET AHOLD OF THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM, THE, THE, THE, UM, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND CLARIFY A COUPLE POSITIONS WHY THEY, THEY ARE REQUIRING THIS AND REMINDING THEM THAT REALLY, THAT OUR LOCAL JURISDICTION ARE THE ONES WHO MAKE THE CALL, NOT THEM ON A LOT OF THESE THINGS.
HOWEVER, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DO NOT PROVIDE PENALTY OR ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST THE APPLICANT BECAUSE THEY DID RECEIVE THE GUIDANCE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AS PART OF THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM.
UM, I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO DO RESEARCH ON THE USE OF STAIN.
UM, I THINK THAT WE COULD EVEN MAKE THAT ONE OF THE TOPICS FOR OUR UPDATES IS FIGURING OUT IF IN FACT WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THIS, AND IF SO, WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS BY WHICH WE ARE GONNA BE ALLOWING STAIN ON HISTORIC, UM, BUILDINGS.
AND THEN, UM, WE SHOULD CAUTION OTHERS THAT JUST BECAUSE THIS IS GOING, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT STAIN IS THERE, THAT THIS IS IN NO WAY AN AN APPROVED PRACTICE BY THE HBC AND THAT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT, UM, IS A FREE FOR ALL.
NOW, FOR ANYBODY WHO HAS SAID THAT THEY WANTED TO PAINT THEIR, THEIR BUILDING NOW CAN JUST TURN TO STAIN AND, AND HAVE IT APPROVED.
BUT IT IS CLEARLY NOT AN APPROVED PRODUCT, UM, FOR BRICKX AT THIS TIME.
THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS AND I'LL BE GLAD TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY AS WELL.
UH, MATT, WHEN YOU WENT BACK TO LOOK AT IT A SECOND TIME RECENTLY MM-HMM
YOU MENTIONED THAT THE COLOR MIGHT HAVE CHANGED IN YOUR PERSPECTIVE.
THE WHAT? THE, UH, COLOR, THE COLORATION.
IS THAT, WHAT WAS YOUR CONCLUSION ON THAT? UM, SO THAT WAS WHAT I WAS TOLD.
UM, AND SO I WENT OUT TO INVESTIGATE.
UM, UH, I, IT MAY HAVE, UH, FADED SLIGHTLY, BUT I FEEL LIKE IT HAS NOT CHANGED APPRECIABLY.
THAT'S JUST, UM, MY OBSERVATION AND I TRIED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WITH THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS.
HAS IT BEEN SIX MONTHS? ABOUT NOT EVEN THAT LONG.
IT SUPPOSED TO AGE A LITTLE BIT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WELL, ADDING TO IT, TO WHAT MIKE HAD TO SAY, UH, WE'VE DEALT WITH A FEW, UH, TAX CREDIT, UH, PROJECTS IN THE PAST, NOT A WHOLE LOT.
UH, IN MY YEARS ON THE HBC, I'M ONLY AWARE OF ANOTHER FEDERAL AND STATE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM THAT WAS, I BELIEVE WHAT'S CALLED THE CLARK BUILDING.
AT THE CORNER OF BROAD AND MIDDLE STREET.
UH, THIS WAS A, A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT SITUATION THAT ALSO GOT, HAD ITS OWN SET OF ENTANGLEMENTS IN THAT SHIPPO WORKED WITH THE, WITH THE APPLICANT.
UH, THE HPC WAS INVOLVED, UH, IN SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS.
AND THE HPC, UH, CONCURRED WITH SHIPPO'S, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT WHEN IT GOT TO THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, THEY SAID, NO, NO, NO, WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT.
SO THE APPLICANT BASICALLY HAD TO UNDO WHAT THEY DID IN ORDER TO GET THE TAX CREDITS.
THIS IS A DIFFERENT SITUATION AND THAT, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, IN, IN A WAY, THE MOTHERSHIP HAS SAID THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN, IN ORDER TO GET THE TAX CREDITS.
UH, WE, YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS TRY TO, TO, UH, ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION AND TAX CREDITS BECOME PART OF THAT SOMETIME.
UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS SOME REAL, THEY WERE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING IN THE SENSE THAT THEY TALKED WITH AMY ELIZABETH, UH, YURBEL, UH, SHE ACTUALLY HAS A MASTER'S IN, UH, HISTORIC PRESERVATION FROM CLEMSON AND COLLEGE IN CHARLESTON.
SHE'S, UH, ALSO THE AUTHOR OF, UH, SOMETHING THAT WE SPEND A LOT, HAVE BEEN SPENDING A LOT OF TIME WITH PRESERVATION, UH, UH,
[00:30:01]
BRIEF 16 ON SUBSTITUTE MATERIAL.SO IT, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY WERE GETTING A RECOMMENDATION FROM SOMEONE WHO, YOU KNOW, WHO WAS WHO, WHO WAS DOWN THE STREET AND SAID, YEAH, THIS IS WHAT I'D RECOMMEND YOU DO.
THEY WERE DEALING WITH THE EXPERTS, UH, AT, UH, AT THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE.
TO ADD TO THAT TOO, SHE SAID THAT MASONRY WAS HER EXPERTISE.
SO, AND I, AND, UH, YOU DID, UH, PICK A SPECIFIC PRODUCT.
SHE REVIEWED IT AND SAID, YES, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, THIS IS FINE.
SO AGAIN, YOU WERE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
IT'S, IT'S A BIT OF, OF A CONUNDRUM THAT YES, WE WERE INVOLVED IN THE DISCUSSION, BUT THIS IS JUST ONE OF THESE SITUATIONS WHERE IT DOESN'T EXACTLY FIT IN THE GUIDELINES.
I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING AT MAKING SOME UPDATES TO GET THE GUIDELINES RIGHT NOW, SAY, USE LATEX PAINT 10 YEARS AGO.
THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH WHAT, WHAT EVERYONE SAID TODAY.
SO I DON'T HAVE PROBLEMS WITH, I DON'T HAVE PROBLEMS WITH, UH, WITH THE STAIN HAVING, HAVING, BEING INVOLVED IN, UH, IN RESTORING AN 18, 18 0 8 HOUSE RIGHT NOW.
I'VE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON STAINS AND PAINTS AND STAINS ARE MORE, ARE MORE BREATHABLE THAN PAINTS BY FAR.
AND I'D, I'D ADD TO WHAT WE WERE SAYING EARLIER.
UM, WE, WE WERE TOLD WE ABSOLUTELY DID NEED TO DO IT FOR THE TAX CREDITS.
IT WASN'T A MATTER OF IF IT'S, IT IS LIKE, YOU DO THIS OR YOU DON'T GET IT.
AND I CAN ADD TO THE CLARK'S BUILDING, I BELIEVE THEY HAD TO REMOVE THE WINDOW THEY HAD INSTALLED AND PUT IN A DIFFERENT WINDOW.
AND SO IT WAS, THAT WAS UNFORTUNATE.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? A COUPLE THINGS I, FIRST OF ALL REFERENCING IS, AS COMMISSIONER THOMPSON DID, WE DID HAVE A 5.4 0.7 GUIDELINE SAYING, MASON REPAINTING MAY BE PERMITTED WHERE SEVERE DAMAGE, PATCHING AND SURFACE REPAIR HAS DIMINISHED THE AESTHETIC INTEGRITY.
AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WOULD WANT NOW.
BUT IN HER LETTER, THAT WAS ALSO A COMMENT MORE OR LESS LIKE THAT, WHICH WAS ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE ORIGINAL APPEARANCE, I BELIEVE HOW SHE PHRASED IT.
AND TO ME, THAT ALMOST PUTS YOU INTO RESTORATION AS OPPOSED TO REHABILITATION.
OUR STANDARDS ARE ALL BASED ON REHABILITATION.
SHE, I THINK, EDGED INTO THE PROPERTY OF RESTORATION.
AND WHEN WE DO RESTORATIONS, WE ONLY LOOK AT THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, UH, SECRETARY OF THE STANDARDS OF INTERIOR STANDARDS GUIDELINES.
THERE'S ONLY ABOUT 12 OF THOSE.
WE DON'T HAVE THE DETAIL WE HAVE IN OURS.
THERE'S JUST THAT ONE PAGE LIST.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU DID WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH YOU DOING THAT.
WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS IS THE FIX FOR EVERYBODY BECAUSE WE NEED TO STUDY THIS, UM, WHETHER OR NOT IT, IT WEATHERS WELL, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, AND PRETTY MUCH PROVE THAT IT DOES ELIMINATE THE RISK OF INTERIOR WATER DAMAGE COMPARED TO PAINT.
SO, BUT I CONCUR WITH WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER
AND IN THE DAYLIGHT, UH, THE BUILDING, THE EXTERIOR HAS BEEN KNOCKED AROUND QUITE A BIT.
ALL THE WINDOWS ON THE, UH, ALLEY SIDE, YOU CAN TELL THAT THEY HAVE BEEN MODIFIED.
I THINK THEY'RE SMALLER WINDOWS, THE, UH, THE BRICK AND MOST LIKELY THE MORTAR THAT WAS USED TO REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE WINDOW OPENINGS IS DIFFERENT.
UH, YOU CAN TELL THAT, UM, THERE'S QUITE A FEW, UH, EFFORTS AT REPOINTING, IF YOU CAN CALL IT THAT
SO THE, IT IT HAS BEEN KNOCKED AROUND QUITE A BIT.
AND I CAN SEE WHERE, UM, MS. YAL WAS, WAS LOOKING AT IT FROM THE SIDE, FROM THE STANDPOINT OF, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE RESTORE SOMETHING THAT THAT LOOKS A MORE, A LITTLE MORE, UH, UH, HOMOGENEOUS FROM THE EXTERIOR.
AND SO BY THOSE COMMENTS, UH, ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT WE APPROVE THE COA MR. THOMPSON? UH, I AM.
I AM WAITING FOR YOU TO MAKE A MOTION
DOES ANYONE COULD THE OTHER RECOMMENDATION TO GET INTO CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS? I DON'T SEE
[00:35:01]
WHERE THIS FITS WITH CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS PARTICULARLY.WELL, THE, THE STAIN IS A CONTEMPORARY MATERIAL.
AND WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE BEFORE.
AND I THINK ALSO TOO, THE WORD STAIN WAS ONLY USED IN THE GUIDELINES FOR WOOD.
THAT IT WAS USED TWICE IN THE GUIDELINES WHAT I COUNTED, RIGHT? MM-HMM
AND NEITHER TIME PERTAINING TO MASON.
SO ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION? I HAVE A, UM, YEAH, A QUESTION.
UH, DOES THE DENIAL OF THE COA CAUSE ANY, UH, FUTURE ISSUES? I MEAN, NOT WITH US, BUT I DON'T THINK, BUT ARE THERE ANY POTENTIAL PROBLEMS FOR THE PROPERTY? WELL, A GREAT QUESTION.
I WAS GONNA SEGUE TO COMMISSIONER WICK'S, UM, UH, PRELIMINARY MOTION, UM, IN THAT, IF IT'S DENIED, WHAT I THINK I'M HEARING IS THAT THE MOTION WOULD INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU FOREGO ANY ENFORCEMENT ACTION AS THE APPLICANT RELIED IN GOOD FAITH ON, ON A, ON A FEDERAL RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN THE MATTER WOULD BE CLOSED.
BUT FOR YOUR RECORD, YOU ARE NOT SUPPORTING THE STATE AT THIS POINT.
THAT, THAT, THAT'S, YOU BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT.
UM, WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO MESS UP THE TAX CREDITS.
AND, AND, AND I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT
YEAH, NO, AND, AND WE'RE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
IT'S JUST THAT WE'RE NOT, I'M, I'M NOT SURE WE'RE, AT LEAST FOR ME, TALKING FOR MYSELF, I'M NOT SURE, UM, THAT IT MEETS THE, THE, THE, THE THRESHOLD OF AN COA APPROVAL.
HOWEVER, YOUR, YOUR, YOUR QUESTION'S A GOOD ONE, I THINK IS WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO ISSUE IF A, IF A NEGATIVE COA MESSES UP THEIR I DON'T THINK IT WOULD.
BUT I THINK THAT'S A, THAT'S A VALID QUESTION, DO YOU THINK? AND I, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD.
IT'S ALREADY DONE DONE DEAL, RIGHT? IT'S JUST DONE.
I MEAN, HAVE YOU, OKAY, SO YOU, YOUR TAX CREDITS ARE ALL APPROVED AT THIS POINT.
AND I GUESS THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, THAT THAT WAS LITERALLY THE LAST THING, AND THIS AS SOON AS WE SAID, WELL, IT'S DONE, YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER SHELLEY HAS SPOKEN TO THE LADY, I BELIEVE, UH, ELIZABETH.
AND SO IF YOU JUST CHARACTERIZE PERHAPS THAT CONVERSATION, UM, WELL, SHE DID SAY THAT, UH, WHEN PEOPLE CONTACT HER WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT, UM, THE REQUIREMENTS AND SUCH FOR THE TAX CREDITS, UM, THEY DO, UH, UH, ADD OR MENTION THAT THEY SHOULD BE SURE TO CONTACT, YOU KNOW, ANY, UH, AND, UH, ADHERE TO ANY STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS.
UH, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE, UH, SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION, UM, THEY SPECIFICALLY DO NOT REFERENCE ANY, UH, YOU KNOW, REFERENCING OR, UH, CAVEAT OR A STATEMENT ABOUT STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE.
SO WITH THAT, IS THERE A MOTION? I THINK JUST A QUESTION FROM MATT.
I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL.
UM, WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF THIS FADING IN COLOR.
UM, AND ONE THING I THINK WE MAY WANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO ON THAT IS, IS THERE A MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE FOR THIS PRODUCT? OR WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THIS REACHES A POINT IN COLOR, ASSUMING IT CONTINUES TO FADE AT SOME RATE, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT REACHES A POINT AT WHICH SOMEONE MAY WANT TO TOUCH THAT UP? UM, DOES IT NEED TO BE TOUCHED UP AFTER A NUMBER OF YEARS, I GUESS IS THE FIRST QUESTION? WELL, THE FIRST PART OF THAT ANSWER IS I WOULD DEFINITELY COME BACK TO Y'ALL
WELL, AND THAT'S, THAT'S, I'LL BE CALLING MATT
THAT'S WHERE I'M HEADED WITH THIS.
AND I GUESS THE QUESTION EITHER WAY, WHETHER THIS IS APPROVED OR DENIED, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, THE, THE TROUBLE IS THAT THIS IS AN IRREVERSIBLE CONDITION AT THIS POINT.
UM, BUT MOVING FORWARD, WOULD THAT, WHAT WOULD TOUCHING THAT UP BE? WOULD THAT BE A MAJOR, WOULD THAT BE A MINOR? WHAT IS THAT? HOW WOULD, HOW WOULD THIS FORWARD VIEW THAT? MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE, MAINTEN MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE.
I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD THINK IT'S PROBABLY NO DIFFERENT THAN PAINTING OF, OF A WOOD SIDING MAINTENANCE.
THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BE MAINTENANCE THAT POINT TREATED IN A SIMILAR FASHION.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER THOMPSON TALKED ABOUT WAS ONE INSTANCE THAT HE RECALLED WHERE LOCAL STANDARD REGULATIONS APPEARED TO BE AT ODDS WITH THE, THE, THE TAX CREDIT PEOPLE OR THE DEPARTMENT INTERIOR OR PARK SERVICE, WHOMEVER.
DO YOU KNOW OF ANY OTHER INSTANCES WHERE THAT HAS COME UP? UH, I DO NOT.
UH, WE'VE HAD QUITE A NUMBER OF TAX CREDIT PROJECTS, UM, IN THE LAST SIX AND A HALF YEARS.
[00:40:01]
AND THAT HASN'T COME UP IN ANY OF THOSE CASES.UM, THEY USUALLY GO THROUGH THE, OUR PROCESS FIRST BEFORE THEY, UM, SUBMIT THEIR, UM, APPLICATIONS TO THE FEDS, SO, OR TO THE STATE.
UM, AND THEN, UH, UH, THE FEDS REVIEW THAT.
SO I THINK THAT IS MAYBE THE, THE CRUX OF THE, BECAUSE I WOULD THINK A LOT OF TIMES THEIR STANDARDS AND OURS ARE, ARE, ARE PRETTY ALIGNED.
WELL, THE FUNDAMENTALLY STANDPOINT, THEY'RE FUNDAMENTALLY ALIGNED BY THE FUNDAMENTAL, BY THE NATURE OF FOUNDATION OF THE, OF THE SECRETARY, OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS, OF THE FOUNDATION FOR ALL OF ALL OF OUR, AND THEIR, UM, STANDARDS OF THE SAME FOUNDATION.
AND MY RECOLLECTION IS IT WAS SOMETHING SO SIMPLE THAT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THEY ADDED A MU DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE WINDOW, AND THAT WASN'T IN THE ORIGINAL.
I, I JUST REMEMBER IT WAS NOT, NOT, YEAH, THEY SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE.
THE STATE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE SAID, THIS IS WHAT YOU GOTTA DO.
THEY PASSED THAT ON TO THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, AND IT WAS DONE.
AND THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CAME BACK SIX MONTHS LATER AND SAID, WAIT A MINUTE, WE SAW THIS.
NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA PROVIDE FEDERAL TAX CREDITS.
AND THE, THE PERSON WORKING ON IT THERE HAD SPENT DAYS AND WEEKS AND, YEAH, THE TWO, TWO YEARS I BELIEVE, GETTING IT RIGHT.
SO IT WASN'T LACK OF EFFORT, BUT, UH, ANYWAY, THEY COULD HAVE HAD A STAFF CHANGE AND SOMEBODY SAID, YOU GOTTA FIX THAT.
SO IS THERE A MOTION YET? NOT YET.
I'M JUST SEEING IF ANYBODY HAD, HAD DISCUSSIONS.
READY, READY FOR A MOTION? ABSOLUTELY.
UM, I MOVE TO FIND THE APPLICATION FOR THE PROJECT AT 2 0 6 CRAVEN STREET TO BE INCONGRUOUS WITH THE NEW BURNS CODE OF ORDINANCES, SECTIONS 15.411 THROUGH 15.429, AND NEW BERN'S HISTORIC DISTRICT STANDARDS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC GUIDELINES, FINDINGS OF FACT SECTIONS, UH, FOUR, FOUR POINT AND 4.2 0.4, UH, MASONRY, 5.5 POINT PAINT, 5.4, 0.5 0.46, AND 5 4 7 CONTEMPORARY.
UM, 5 5 2 CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS.
UM, UH, THERE WERE FINDINGS OF FACT, BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THE APPLICATION, UM, ARE THAT THIS IS FOR STAINING EXTERIOR BRICK IN ALL ABCS IN THE DENSE FABRIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, THAT THE USE OF THE STAIN AND NOT A PAINT WAS TO ADDRESS, WAS NOT TO ADDRESS ANY WATER INFILTRATION OR PENETRATION ISSUES, BUT MET, BUT MET RATHER, AS AN AESTHETIC MEASURE SUGGESTED AND REQUIRED BY THE STAFF OF THE US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ADDRESS A REQUIRED ALTERATION TO BETTER MATCH THE HOMOGENEOUS APPEARANCE THAT WAS PRESENT AT THE START OF THE PROJECT.
THE STAIN CREATES AN OPAQUE, FULLY HOMOGENEOUS COLOR OVER A SURFACE THAT WAS NEVER COMPLETELY HOMOGENEOUS, AND THEREFORE PERMANENTLY CONCEALS A SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTIC OF THE HISTORIC BRICK WALLS.
THE PROPOSED MATERIAL DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS.
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
THE PROJECT IS NOT, EXCUSE ME, IS INCONGRUOUS WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS.
UM, I WANT A, A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL PARTS TO THE MOTION.
I WANT TO NOTE THAT THE HBC SHALL NOT TAKE, UH, PROVIDE ANY PENALTY OR ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST THE APPLICANT, UM, PRIMARILY DUE TO THE GUIDANCE AND REQUIREMENTS RECEIVED THROUGH THE TAX CREDIT PROGRAM.
AND, UM, LET'S ADD GOOD FAITH RELIANCE ON THAT PROGRAM DIRECTION, BETTER SAID, AND THAT AS A CONDITION THAT, UM, THE, THAT THE MATERIAL THAT HAS BEEN APPLIED, UM, WILL NOT AND CANNOT BE REMOVED.
UM, AND, AND SO THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO DO THAT AS WELL.
AND I, I THINK THAT'S ALL, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? ALL
[00:45:01]
THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.OPPOSED? AND WE DO NOT ISSUE A COA.
IT DID IMPROVE THE APPEARANCE, SO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
[5.C. 609 E. Front St. — to include a new detached carport and paving in the Tertiary AVC.]
TO THE ADDRESS.SO, UH, THIS IS THE, UH, APPLICATION FOR THIS ONE.
UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER IS MICHAEL ANDERSON.
UH, AND ALSO, UH, GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN.
PLLC IS THEIR REPRESENTATIVE, UH, AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
AND THEY HAVE THE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED WORK IS TO REMOVE THE EXISTING RAISED STORAGE SHED, PLAYGROUND AND SAND AND REPLACE WITH A TWO BAY CARPORT WITH STORAGE AND INTERLOCKING PAVER DRIVEWAY AND PARKING.
WE'VE LISTED, UM, A LARGE NUMBER OF HISTORIC DISTRICT STANDARDS, UH, AND THE MATERIALS TO BE USED AND REFERENCED.
UH, THEY'VE CHECKED OFF ALL THE VARIOUS APPROPRIATE BOXES.
MS. LERACH FROM GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN HAS SIGNED AND DATED THE APPLICATION.
THIS IS INDEED THE, UM, OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION FORM, UH, NAMING GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AS THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
UH, AND THE ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REVIEW OF THIS, UM, HAS INDICATED THAT IT DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND USE ORDINANCE AND A ZONING PERMIT HAS BEEN ISSUED, UH, AND THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTORS INDICATED THAT IT WILL, UH, NOT REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT.
UH, HOWEVER, THEN HE SAYS BUILDING AND FLOOD LANE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS ARE REQUIRED.
SO I THINK HE CHECKED OFF THE WRONG BOX THERE, BUT, UM, STILL THEY'RE BOTH REQUIRED.
AND, UH, SO TO, FOR THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION IS THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY.
WE DID GO OVER THIS AS BEFORE, UM, IN THE DESIGN REVIEW, UH, MEETING IN MORE DETAIL.
UH, AND, UH, THIS IS ZOOMING IN ON THAT PROPERTY.
AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BACKYARD TO THIS, UH, TO THIS PROPERTY.
IT'S THE SUBJECT AREA OF THE PROJECT.
UH, AND THEN THE REAR PORTION OF THE BACKYARD, TO BE EVEN MORE SPECIFIC, UH, SHOWING THE AERIAL VIEW OF THAT AREA.
THIS, UH, LIGHT AREA IS ACTUALLY THE SAND AREA FOR THE, UH, PLAYGROUND.
AND UNDERNEATH THE TREES HERE IN THE LOWER, UH, PORTION OF THIS CORNER, UH, IS WHERE THE EXISTING, UM, SHED IS, UH, THE, THE, WE NORMALLY PROVIDE SOME OF THESE PHOTOS, BUT THE APPLICANT HAS, UM, ALREADY PROVIDED MANY OF THESE CONTEXT PHOTOS HERE.
THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE STYLE AND CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE.
UM, AND THEN, UH, QUITE A FEW, UH, CONTEXT PHOTOGRAPHS TO SHOW, UH, THE DRIVEWAY, THE EXISTING SHED AND THE PLAY AREA.
AND THEN FROM THE BACK, LOOKING BACK AT THE HOUSE AND THE SITUATION, THE SITE WHERE THE ACTUAL PROJECT IS TO BE LOCATED, WHICH IS HERE, UH, ESSENTIALLY TO THE RIGHT OF THE, OF WHERE THIS CAR IS PARKED AT THE MOMENT, UH, AND MORE IN THIS CORNER OF THE, UH, REAR YARD.
SO HERE'S THE, UH, EXISTING, UH, SITE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY.
UH, THE HOUSE IS THE DARK AREA HERE, AND THE STREET IS OUT TO THE RIGHT.
UM, THE AREA OF THE PROJECT IS ON THE LEFT, UH, AND THE SHADED AREA IS BOTH THE, UH, THE PLAY AREA AND THE SHED THAT ARE TO BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO MAKE WAY FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, AND, UH, THIS IS NOW THE SITE PLAN FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, THE, UM, THE PLAYGROUND'S BEEN REMOVED.
THE TREE THAT WAS THERE AT THE PLAYGROUND WAS, IS TO REMAIN.
AND THE, UH, CARPORT IS LOCATED ON THE MORE SOUTHERN, UH, SIDE OF THIS, OF THE BACKYARD.
AND YOU CAN SEE FROM THE DESIGN OF THIS THAT THERE IS A TWO CAR, UH, TWO-CAR, A TWO BAY, UM, DESIGN FOR THE CARPORT.
UM, THE SIDES WE'LL SEE IN A SECOND, BUT THEY ALSO INCLUDE A STORAGE AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OR WEST END OF THE CARPORT.
UH, THE DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION.
AND THE, UH, WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE,
[00:50:01]
UM, THE LIMIT OF, UM, VEHICLE, UM, SURFACE AREA, UM, THAT'S BEEN REVISED HERE, UH, WITH, UH, SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, REMOVAL OF SOME OF THE PAVING ON THE UPPER SIDE HERE, UH, IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE ONE REQUIREMENT IN THE R STANDARDS.SO TO LOOK AT THE, UH, ELEVATIONS, UH, ON THE UPPER LEFT IS AS IF WE'RE LOOKING INTO THE CARPORT.
UM, YOU CAN SEE, SAY TWO VEHICLES HERE.
UH, THERE'S A, A COLUMN ON THE LEFT, UH, RELATIVELY LOW SLOPING ROOF AND A COLUMN ON THE RIGHT.
UM, AND, UM, UH, YOU CAN BARELY SEE, UH, ON THE END THERE IS SOME BRICK WORK AT THE BOTTOM OF THOSE COLUMNS.
AND THEN ON THE SIDES, YOU CAN SEE IT'S MUCH MORE PROMINENT.
THE BRICK WORK, UH, FOUNDATION, UH, ABOUT TWO AND A HALF FEET TALL.
AND THEN, UH, THE SIDES ARE ENCLOSED WITH SOME LATTICE WORK.
AND YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE TWO MORE COLUMNS, UM, TO, UH, FINISH OFF THE, UM, CAR STORAGE AREA OR THE CARPORT AREA.
AND THEN THE STORAGE AREA IS ACTUALLY A, UM, A SHED ROOF ADDITION, YOU KNOW, IN APPEARANCE ON THE BACK WITH, UH, SIDING.
AND, UM, THE SIDING IS THE HARDY BOARD, HARDY PLANK TYPE OF SIDING.
AND THEN ON THE BACK, UH, SAME THING, UH, AS THIS, AS THAT WITH THE, UH, THIS BEING THE STOR BACK OF THE STORAGE AREA, YOU CAN SEE THE TWO DIFFERENT ROOF, UH, LEVELS HERE.
AND THERE IS EVEN A SMALL AREA HARDY PLANK ABOVE THE, BETWEEN THE TWO ROOFS.
UM, AND THEN THIS LAST ONE ACTUALLY INCLUDES, UH, UM, THE CONTEXT OF ITS DISTANCE FROM THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
AND, UH, THE WAY IT RELATES, UH, THE DESIGN RELATES TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
AND, UM, THE, THIS SIDE IS EXACTLY THIS, THIS BEING THEN THE, UM, LET'S SEE, THIS IS THE NORTHERN SIDE, YES.
UH, AND, UH, EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE SOUTHERN SIDE.
JUST REVERSED, UM, ALMOST DONE HERE, I BELIEVE.
YEP, THAT'S IT ON THE DESIGN OF THAT.
SO OUR STAFF REPORTS READY WHENEVER YOU ARE.
YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO PRESENT? UM, THE ONLY, UM, IF YOU JUST GIVE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, PLEASE.
SARAH ABA GOER ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN.
THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO SAY WAS THAT THE, UH, THE BRICK BASE ON IT, WE PUT IT THERE JUST BECAUSE IT'S IN THE FLOOD PLAIN AND TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, IF THAT AREA GOT WET, THAT IT WOULD BE EASY TO SPRAY OUT AND KEEP CLEAN.
DOESN'T APPEAR ANYONE IS HERE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPERTY.
UM, ANY COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? I'M SORRY, YOU WANT ME TO GO STAFF FINDINGS? YEP, SURE.
UH, SO THE O OWNER AND APPLICANT IS MICHAEL ANDERSON.
AND GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, PLC PROJECT ADDRESS 6 0 9 EAST FRONT STREET, UH, AND THE HISTORIC PROPERTY NAME.
AND THE DATE BUILT IS THE ARMSTRONG HOUSE, 1910.
IT IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
THE NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY FOR THAT FROM TWO 2003 IS, IT'S A FOUR SQUARE, TWO STORIES, FOUR BAYS WIDE AT THE FIRST LEVEL, THREE BAYS WIDE AT THE SECOND LEVEL, FIVE BAYS DEEP, 16 OVER ONE SASH, A HIP ROOF, FRONT PORCH, SQUARE POSTS, HIP ROOF, DORMER, BROAD EAVES, AND TWIN INTERIOR CHIMNEYS AND NORTH ROOF SLOPE.
UM, I INCLUDED, UH, SOME, UH, EXCERPT FROM THE SAND BACK DESCRIPTION OF 1988.
UM, UH, WE CAN, UH, GO SKIP THAT FOR THIS, UH, APPLICATION SINCE THIS IS TOTALLY UNCONNECTED TO THE STRUCTURE.
THE PROJECT IS TO INCLUDE A NEW DETACHED CARPORT AND PAVING IN THE TERTIARY A, B, C.
AND TO FACILITATE DISCUSSION AND EMOTION, STAFF PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS, FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE GUIDELINES THAT MAY, MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO THIS APPLICATION.
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES 2.6 0.1, AND 2.6 0.2 FOR PARKING, 2.7 0.2 FOR DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1, 3.2, AND THREE POINT AND 3.5 FOR FOUNDATIONS.
4.2 AND THREE FOR WALLS, TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION, 4.2 0.4 AND FIVE FOR ROOFS.
4.54 FOR MASONRY, 5.3 AND FIVE FOR PAINT.
CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5.5, 1, 2, 3, 5, AND SIX.
[00:55:01]
SO THE STATEMENTS OF REASON BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION AND STAFF'S JUDGMENT ARE ONE, THE APPLICATION IS FOR A NEW DETACHED CARPORT AND PAVING IN THE TERTIARY A VC IN THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.TWO, THE PROPOSED MATERIALS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HISTORIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS.
THREE, THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
AND FOUR, THE PROJECT IS NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS.
HPC MAY WANT TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT ONE, ANY REVISIONS OF THE APPLICATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT TO THE HPC STAFF, OR APPROVAL BY STAFF OR THE HPC ACCORDING TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS PRIOR TO THE FINAL INSPECTION BY THE BUILDING INSPECTIONS DIVISION.
ANY COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? QUESTIONS? YEAH.
UH, TWO, I I, I SEE THAT YOU'VE CHANGED THE, UH, DRIVEWAY SQUARE FOOT TO, TO BE WITH LESS THAN THAN HALF.
THE OTHER QUESTION WE HAD AT DESIGN REVIEW WAS ABOUT LIGHTING.
THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER THERE WAS GONNA BE LIGHTING, UM, ON THE NEW STRUCTURE OR, OR NOT.
I INCLUDED A LIGHT IN THE PACKET.
DID THAT NOT MAKE IT IN? UH, I DID NOT SEE THAT.
THERE, IT WAS JUST AN INTERIOR LIGHT.
SO AT THIS, IN INSIDE THE, THE STRUCTURE INSIDE UNDERNEATH.
AND THAT WAS, SO THAT WOULDN'T REALLY, NO, THAT WOULDN'T, I MEAN, I MEAN, THERE'S REALLY NO OTHER PLACE TO PUT A LIGHT UNLESS YOU PUT A MOTION SENSOR LIGHT.
WELL, I WAS WONDERING OF IF THERE WAS ANY KIND OF EXTERIOR LIGHTING ON, ON THE STRUCTURE.
THE, THE ONES THAT I SHOWED, UM, IT'S JUST A, A SQUARE MOUNTED LIGHT THAT IS MOTION SENSORED.
SO YOU WOULD DRIVE IN THERE AND IT WOULD TURN ON.
UM, BUT I DID NOT PROPOSE ANY EXTERIOR SECURITY LIGHTING.
BUT IF THE OWNER WANTS TO, YOU KNOW, PUT THAT IN, WE CAN HAVE MATT APPROVE THAT.
THAT CAN ALWAYS AMEND THE, UH, COA IN THE FUTURE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION'S COMPLETE.
THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER YOU WANTED ASPHALT OR METAL ROOF, AND YOU KEPT THE METAL ROOF.
YEAH, WE WE'RE PROPOSING THE METAL ROOF.
UM, I'M NOT SURE IF YOUR EXACT WORDING MADE IT ON THOSE PLANS.
OH, I THINK IT DID FOR THE, THE PAN WITH MM-HMM
TRYING TO, TRYING TO BE DILIGENT ABOUT PUTTING THAT ON THERE.
SO, SO YOU'RE STAYING WITH, WITH THE METAL? YES.
AND, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE, THE SITE PLAN I SENT MATT, THE, THE OUTLINE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE POLY LINE THAT SHOWS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR EACH OF THEM.
AND I DID, I DID CALCULATE IT A LITTLE INCORRECTLY, SO WE KIND OF WENT BACK AND FORTH, MOVED A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE HOUSE, AND, UH, I THINK IT'LL BE, IT'LL BE FINE.
ANYTHING ELSE? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, WHAT MATERIALS OR, NO, NO, NO QUESTIONS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THIS DESIGN REVIEW FOR, FOR SOME TIME, AND I REALLY THINK THAT THIS DOES MAIN PRESERVE THE CHARACTER AND THE, HIS ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIC FABRIC.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ALWAYS LOOK FOR.
AND, AND I THINK THIS, THIS, UH, THIS PROJECT, UH, DOES THAT, YEAH, IT'S, IT'S AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT CERTAINLY IS MUCH LESS THAN SCALE, UH, COMPARED TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE, WHICH IS WHAT WE LOOK FOR MM-HMM
BUT IT, IT IS CERTAINLY NOT OUT OF LINE FOR OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE AREA AND, AND, AND NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO I, I THINK IT'S, UH, I THINK IT'S, UH, I THINK IT'S A WELL DONE PROJECT.
ANYONE HAVE A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN? I'D LIKE, UH, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE FIND THAT THE APPLICATION FOR 6 0 9 EAST FRONT STREET, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, UH, UH, TO BE NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH NEW BERN'S CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTIONS 15 DASH FOUR 11 TO 15 DASH 4 29 AND NEW BERN'S HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS BASED ON THE FINE, UH, FOLLOWING GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, GUIDELINES, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES 2.6 0.1 2.6 0.2, PARKING 2.7 0.2, DESIGN PRINCIPLES, 3.1, 0.3 0.1 0.2, 3.1 0.3 0.15 FOUNDATIONS,
[01:00:01]
4.2, 4.3 WALLS, TRIM AND ORNAMENTATION, 4.4 4.5, ROOFS 4.5 0.4 MASONRY, 5.35 POINT PAINT 4.52, CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS, 5 5 5 3 5 0.5 AND 5.5.FINDINGS OF FACT, UH, THE APPLICATION IS FOR A NEW DETACHED, UH, CARPORT SLASH GARAGE IN THE TERTIARY AREA.
A TIGHT WEEK DEVELOPMENT, UH, PATTERN.
THE PROPOSED MATERIALS, UH, MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES.
IT'S ONLY ADMINISTRATOR AND CHIEF, UH, BUILDING OFFICIAL HAVE REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND MADE APPROPRIATE COMMENTS.
AND THE PROJECT IS NOT IN CONGRESS WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS, AND THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT DIMINISH THE SPECIAL CHARACTER OF THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT.
ONE CONDITION IS THAT ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE APPLICATION THAT THE HPC APPROVES TONIGHT, THOSE MODIFICATIONS WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE, UM, UH, HPC STAFF, UH, AND POSSIBLE REVIEW BY THE HPC AS WELL.
A OPPOSED? MOTION TO MOVE TO ISSUE THE C-O-A-C-O-A.
UM, I DID NOT GET TO SEE TRIPS PLAQUE, BUT I HOPE YOU MADE MENTION OF ADES ON THERE.
IF YOU COULD EDIT A COUPLE TO THE CARPORT WOULD'VE BEEN NICE.
I DID, I CHANGED THE, UH, THE IMAGE OUT TO SHOW HIS NEW ANNEX ON THERE, SO WE NOTICED THAT THAT WAS NICE.
MIKE, YOU MADE THE MOTION FOR THE C-O-A-C-O-A? YES.
OKAY, WITH THAT, WE ARE GONNA PROCEED ALL WE HAVE WITH US TONIGHT.
WE HAVE NO OLD BUSINESS, I SUPPOSE,
ANY OLD BUSINESS, NEW BUSINESS.
[7.A. Report on Special Meetinqs and Survey]
HAVE THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPING SERVICES, JESSICA RU TONIGHT TO PRESENT A GOOD SUMMARY OF THE SURVEY THAT WE DID BETWEEN OCTOBER 17TH AND NOVEMBER 6TH OR 10TH.AND AS WELL AS THE, UH, CHARETTE MEETINGS WE HELD IN TWO LOCATIONS, AND I THINK THEY ALL WENT VERY WELL.
SO WITH THAT, MS. RUTH, THANK YOU FOR COMING.
TALKING ABOUT NEW OLD BUSINESS WITH YOU GUYS THIS EVENING.
MATT, IF YOU, MATT'S GONNA DRIVE.
WE'RE GONNA SUMMARIZE SOME OF OUR OUTREACH EFFORTS THAT WE STARTED ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO.
AGAIN, JUST TO REMIND THOSE THAT MIGHT BE WATCHING AT HOME, WE HAD TWO MEETINGS THAT WERE AIMED AT SOLICITING FEEDBACK AND GETTING INPUT AND SHARING IDEAS WITH THE PUBLIC.
WE HELD THOSE MEETINGS ON NOVEMBER 6TH AND NOVEMBER 10TH.
COLLECTIVELY, WE HAD ABOUT 50 PEOPLE COME SPEAK WITH US, ROTATE THROUGH TABLES, ANSWER FIVE DIFFERENT QUESTIONS, UM, AND JUST HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO MEET US, FOR US TO MEET THEM.
AND THEN CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS, WE HAD A SURVEY.
THAT SURVEY RAN FOR ABOUT SIX WEEKS.
WE HAD 270 RESPONDENTS TO THAT SURVEY.
YOU'LL SEE HERE, UM, WE DO HAVE A BREAKDOWN OF WHERE THOSE RESPONDENTS ARE FROM OR HOW THEY CATEGORIZE THEMSELVES ABOUT HALF WORK OR OWN A BUSINESS IN THAT DISTRICT OR LIVE IN THE DISTRICT AND OWN PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT.
AND ABOUT DON'T IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, EVERYONE HAS THAT SURVEY DATA.
THEY HAVE THE RAW DATA AND THE SUMMARY OF THE DATA WITH THE CHARTS AND THINGS.
YOU CAN, UM, TAKE THAT DATA AND RUN IT IN DIFFERENT WAYS USING JUST THE EXCEL SHEET THAT IT'S IN AND GET ANSWERS MORE SPECIFICALLY.
BUT THIS AGAIN, WAS JUST TO GIVE US A BROAD IDEA OF WHAT WAS GOING ON OUT THERE WHERE PEOPLE MIGHT NOT UNDERSTAND WHERE WE HAD ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT AND MAYBE WHAT WE WERE DOING RIGHT.
JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS WAS NOT SOLELY FOCUSED ON OUR DOCUMENTS AND OUR ORDINANCE.
AND FORGIVE ME, I SAY GUIDELINES ALL THE TIME.
UM, THIS WAS ALSO ON OUR PROCESSES, ON OUR EFFICIENCY, ON THEIR INTERACTIONS WITH STAFF, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE.
[01:05:01]
AND SO AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND WE MAKE THESE UPDATES, WE WANT TO REALLY, UH, MAINTAIN IN THE FOREFRONT AND FOCUS ON, THERE'S MULTIPLE THINGS THAT WE MAY WANT TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS AND CHANGES TO, NOT JUST THESE DOCUMENTS.UH, WHAT WE GLEANED FROM THE SURVEY AND WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS MOST APPLICABLE TO OUR CONVERSATION THIS EVENING.
UH, THE FIRST THING THAT WE'RE STARTING WITH IS HISTORY AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS ARE, ARE THEY IMPORTANT? UM, WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THAT OR NOT, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT HOW MUCH ATTENTION AND HOW MANY RESOURCES WE PUT IN OUR HISTORIC AREA.
MANY PEOPLE FEEL THAT IS PART OF NEW BERN'S BRAND.
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE, ARE BUILT ON.
OTHER PEOPLE FEEL DIFFERENTLY.
THE RESPONDENT TO THE SURVEY OVERWHELMINGLY THOUGHT, YES, HISTORY AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT.
IT WAS ONE OF OUR STRONGEST, UM, ANSWERS THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE SURVEY EFFORTS.
HAVING THE HPC AND APPROPRIATE DESIGN STANDARDS IS NECESSARY TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR THE FUTURE.
THE MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS DO AGREE OR STRONGLY AGREE AND AGREE THAT THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE AND THAT THERE IS VALUE IN WHAT WE'RE DOING IN OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM AND WHAT YOU ALL DO AT YOUR TWO MEETINGS EVERY MONTH.
NEXT, PLEASE, UH, OPINIONS ON WHETHER THE HPC IS FULFILLING YOUR ROLE.
UH, OVER HALF OF THE RESPONDENT SAID YES, AND THEN WE HAD ANOTHER HALF UNCLEAR OR SAYING NO.
UH, THIS QUESTION DEALT WITH CONSISTENCY.
UH, DO YOU FEEL, BECAUSE WE HEAR OFTEN THAT THINGS ARE INCONSISTENT OR DIFFICULT TO PREDICT, UM, WHETHER OR NOT THESE DECISIONS ARE CONSISTENT? UM, WE HAD 46 PEOPLE ANSWER YES.
AND THE MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS SAY THEY WEREN'T SURE, SORT OF INDICATES TO ME PERHAPS THEY HAVEN'T HAD INTERACTIONS WITH YOU AND SIMPLY TOOK THE SURVEY.
ARE THE PROCESSES AND DECISIONS TRANSPARENT? OVERWHELMINGLY NOT SURE.
UH, IF YOU READ THROUGH THE COMMENTS, WHICH YOU ALL WERE ABLE TO SEE, THAT GLEANS A LITTLE MORE INSIGHT ONTO WHY PEOPLE, UH, PERHAPS ANSWERED.
IN SOME CASES, I FEEL, UH, MAYBE WE NEED TO JUST DO A LITTLE PR WORK.
IN OTHER CASES, THEY WERE ABLE TO CITE SOME EXAMPLES.
DO YOU BELIEVE THE HPC IS CURRENTLY PERFORMING? UH, THE RESPONSIBILITIES APPROPRIATELY? WE HAD, UH, THE MAJORITY THAT ANSWERED SAY YES.
AND AGAIN, MIXED BETWEEN NO AND NOT SURE.
THAT MAY JUST BE A LACK OF AWARENESS BY THE RESPONDENT.
IAN, BY NEGLECT, DO YOU BELIEVE THE HPC IS CURRENTLY PERFORMING THIS RESPONSIBILITY APPROPRIATELY? THIS WAS A VERY EVENLY SPLIT BETWEEN YES AND NO.
OVERWHELMING, UH, NUMBER OF RESPONSES.
IS THE CURRENT LEVEL OF ENFORCEMENT APPROPRIATE AGAIN? UH, WE HAD 67 PEOPLE ANSWER.
NO, THE MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS, UH, WE'RE NOT SURE THESE, UH, COMMENTS IN THOSE, UM, IN THAT QUESTION VERY MUCH MIRRORED SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD AT OUR OUTREACH MEETINGS.
UH, AGAIN, THIS IS ANOTHER, UH, QUESTION THAT WE HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS ON.
DIDN'T GLEAN A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION FROM THIS QUESTION.
UM, THE CURRENT LEVEL OF ENFORCEMENT OF DESIGN STANDARDS AND COA PROCESS SHOULD BE INCREASED.
THESE ANSWERS WERE TOTAL MIXED BAG OR NEITHER AGREE NOR DISAGREE.
I WOULD SAY ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT I HEARD MOST AT OUR OUTREACH MEETINGS WAS, PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE ENFORCEMENT.
MANY TIMES PEOPLE WERE CITING EXAMPLE THAT THEY HAD PUT A LOT OF MONEY AND EFFORT INTO THEIR HOME AND PERHAPS ARE LOOKING AT ADJACENT NEIGHBORS OR NEARBY PROPERTIES THAT HAVE NOT DONE THE SAME THING.
HAVE YOU USED THE SYSTEM? UM, LESS THAN HALF OF THEIR RESPONDENTS HAD APPLIED AND GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS.
JUST KEEP THAT IN THE, IN THE FOREFRONT.
AS WE CONSIDER THE WEIGHT OF THE ANSWERS OF THESE QUESTIONS,
[01:10:04]
THE EXISTING PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS IS EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT.OVERWHELMINGLY, PEOPLE DID NOT HAVE AN OPINION.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS? UM, THIS IS PRETTY MUCH SPLIT.
FIFTY, FIFTY, A HUNDRED AND EIGHT PEOPLE THAT ANSWERED THE SURVEY WERE FAMILIAR WITH 'EM AND HAD LOOKED AT THEM.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY PRETTY GOOD.
UH, YOU NEED TO GET A HE DRIVER.
I'M GLAD I'M NOT PAYING HIM AN UBER TIP.
UM, ARE THERE CHANGES THAT SHOULD BE MADE TO DESIGN STANDARDS? YES.
AND WE HAVE BEEN HEARING THIS, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG REASONS THAT WE STARTED THESE OUTREACH EFFORTS.
UM, 88 PEOPLE FELT YES, CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE.
THERE ARE SOME MORE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE COMMENTS, LOTS OF THINGS ABOUT POSSIBLY EXPANDING ALLOWED MATERIALS, MAKING THINGS MORE EFFICIENT, WERE CITED.
ARE THERE AREAS THAT SHOULD BE LOOSENED OR TIGHTENED? UH, OVERWHELMINGLY 108 RESPONDENTS SAID YES.
MANY PEOPLE DID NOT ADD ANY INSIGHT OR GIVE ANY SPECIFICS ON WHAT THEY ACTUALLY THOUGHT NEEDED TO BE LOOSENED OR TIGHTENED.
THE EXISTING DI DESIGN STANDARDS ARE TOO RESTRICTIVE.
AGAIN, THIS DIDN'T OFFER US A LOT OF INFORMATION.
THE MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS NEITHER AGREED NOR DISAGREED WITH THAT STATEMENT.
AND SO THAT BRINGS US TO KIND OF ACCUMULATION OF WHAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM OUR SURVEY EFFORTS AND WHAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM OUR OUTREACH MEETINGS, THINGS THAT HAD COME UP.
UH, SOMETIMES PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE, UH, REASON FOR A REQUIREMENT OR WHY THEY'RE BEING ASKED TO DO SOMETHING.
IT WAS SPECIFICALLY POINTED OUT BY SEVERAL PEOPLE AT OUR FIRST MEETING, WE MIGHT BENEFIT FROM SOME INTENT STATEMENTS WHEN, UH, A REQUIREMENT MIGHT SEEM A LITTLE STRANGE, UH, IN THE PLANNING WORLD, INTENT STATEMENTS ARE FREQUENTLY SEEN IN A ZONING ORDINANCE AND THEY JUST OUTLINE IN CASE YOU GO TO THE WORDS.
AND YOU CAN'T FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT THOSE WORDS MEAN.
YOU GO BACK TO THE INTENT STATEMENT.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE INTENT STATEMENTS CAN BE VERY USEFUL.
WE HEARD THAT WE COULD USE A REFRESH ON OUR WEBSITE, WHICH I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH.
WE HEARD OVER AND OVER SPECIFICALLY ON THE MATERIALS, THE HIGH, HIGH, HIGH COST OF WINDOWS CAME UP AT BOTH MEETINGS.
AND THAT WAS ALSO MENTIONED IN THE SURVEY.
AND ALSO PEOPLE ASKING TO, UM, LOOK AT A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT SITING OPTIONS.
WE DO KNOW, AND I KNOW MANY OF YOU HAVE DONE RESEARCH ON YOUR OWN TIME, THAT THERE'S DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
UH, MANY CITIES HAVE TAKEN THE APPROACH THAT THEY WILL ALLOW SOME ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS, AND MANY HAVE HAVE STOOD AND SAID, WE'VE EVALUATED THIS AND LOOKED AT IT AND WE DON'T FEEL IT'S APPROPRIATE HERE.
I ENVISION THIS AS A CONVERSATION THAT WE WILL NEED TO HAVE TO, TO THOROUGHLY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN ON ANY CHANGES WE MAY BE PROPOSING.
THEY'D LIKE TO SEE A SEARCHABLE DOCUMENT, WHICH IS VERY EASILY FIXABLE.
SEVERAL PEOPLE EXPRESSED FRUSTRATION THAT THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHEN THEY PURCHASED THEIR HOUSE, HOW COMPLICATED IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, UH, TO MAKE UPDATES AND RENOVATE IT, AND SUGGESTED MAYBE THEIR REALTORS COULD USE A REFRESHER ON SOME OF THE HISTORIC GUIDELINES.
WE STARTED MAKING CHANGES, UH, WHAT ABOUT FOUR MONTHS AGO? WE MADE SOME CHANGES TO THAT LIST.
NOW I THINK ON, ON THE MINOR LIST, WE WANT TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN, COMPARE OURS TO SOME OTHERS.
I THINK AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS, AGAIN, THERE WAS A VERY HEAVY SENTIMENT THAT THAT CITY NEEDED TO INCREASE ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS, UM, PARTICULARLY ON HOUSES THAT WERE IN DISREPAIR.
AND THEN ALSO TO MAKE THE PROCESS A LITTLE LESS INTIMIDATING TO THE DESIGN PROFESSIONALS THAT SHOWED UP PRIMARILY AT THE SECOND MEETING.
THEY DIDN'T FEEL IT WAS SO INTIMIDATING, BUT THERE WAS COMMENTS MADE IN THE SURVEY COMMENTS AND ALSO COMMENTS MADE AT OUR FIRST MEETING THAT IT'S A LITTLE OVERWHELMING FOR SOME PEOPLE TO COME STAND UP HERE AND AFTER THEY'VE GONE THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS AND THEN HAVE, HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT.
[01:15:01]
OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO IMPROVE THAT AS WELL.AND SO WITH THAT, I KNOW YOU'VE ALL RECEIVED ALL THIS INFORMATION.
WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION THIS EVENING ON, UM, HOW TO MOVE FORWARD.
I THINK WE'VE GOT SEVERAL DIFFERENT PROJECTS GOING ON.
IN ADDITION TO ACTUALLY UPDATING THE TEXT OF, OF OUR, OUR LAWS AND ORDINANCES HERE.
WE ALSO HAVE SOME PROCESS THINGS TO TALK ABOUT POSSIBLY AND, UM, A COUPLE OF OTHER AR ARENAS WHERE WE MIGHT WANNA SEE SOME IMPROVEMENTS.
SO I AM GOING TO SIT DOWN, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO THE CHAIRMAN TO LEAD THIS CONVERSATION AND I'M HAPPY TO HOP BACK UP IF YOU NEED ME AGAIN.
I DO DO WANT TO SAY THAT WE'VE TALKED BRIEFLY AT OUR LAST, UH, DESIGN REVIEW AND OUR FIRST DISCUSSION AMONGST COMMISSIONERS WILL BE IN THE UPCOMING REGULARLY SCHEDULED DESIGN REVIEW MEETING FEBRUARY 4TH, FIVE 30 AT THE FIRST AVENUE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OFFICE.
WE'LL BEGIN DISCUSSIONS ON CLARIFICATIONS, DESIGN TO CONSIDER RESILIENCE MATERIALS, UH, EFFICIENCY, UH, AND WE'LL ASK THE STAFF.
WE WILL BE ASKING THE STAFF ABOUT ENFORCEMENT.
UH, AND WE'LL ALSO CONSIDER OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE.
I THINK WE NEED TO EXPLAIN SOME THINGS BETTER.
WE DON'T ALWAYS GET AN OPPORTUNITY.
THERE'S NO AUDIENCE MOST OF THE TIME, AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY WATCHES THIS AT HOME FOR ENTERTAINMENT, BUT, UH, IT IS INTIMIDATING.
BUT I THINK IF YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH DESIGN REVIEW, THE GOAL THERE IS TO MAKE YOU COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA SURPRISE YOU WHEN YOU COME TO THE HEARING AND HOPE THOSE AREN'T TELEVISED.
BUT HOPEFULLY, UH, PEOPLE COME IN THAT AREN'T EXPECTING TO BE GRILLED ABOUT SOMETHING THEY'VE NEVER HEARD OF.
AND SO THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE GETS ACROSS.
I THINK WE NEED TO DO MORE EXPLAINING OF WHAT WE DID AT DESIGN REVIEW.
I THINK WE TRIED TO START TONIGHT, UM, THAT THESE THINGS WERE ALL DISCUSSED AND WE PROBABLY SPENT FOUR TIMES AS MANY MINUTES ON THAT AS WE DO IN THE HEARING.
THERE'S REALLY NOTHING WE CAN DO, AND SCOTT CAN COME IN ABOUT A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING.
AND SO YOU DO HAVE TO STAND UP.
YOU DO HAVE TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS.
YOU DO HAVE TO PREPARE FOR REBUTTAL.
AND IF SOMEONE SHOWS UP WHO'S A NEIGHBOR, YOU HAVE TO BE PREPARED FOR THAT.
UH, THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN, BUT MAYBE WE OUGHT TO PREPARE THE PERSON BETTER FOR THAT.
THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, IN ONE OF YOUR LETTERS TO THEM, YOUR EMAILS TO THEM THAT THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FROM NEIGHBORS, WHICH YOU HAVEN'T CONSIDERED YET.
OR IF YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD QUESTIONS FROM NEIGHBORS, THEY MAY APPEAR AT THE HEARING.
UH, I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE EXPECT THAT OR NOT.
UM, SO ANYWAY, WE WILL BE MR. CHAIR.
NO, UM, AND JESSICA HAS OFFERED THAT WHEN THE FINAL PRODUCTS ADOPTED, WE HAVE A CONSULTANT TO EMPLOY, TO EMPLOY THE CONSULTANT, TO PACKAGE IT IN A MORE USER FRIENDLY FORMAT.
THE ONLY CAUTION I HAVE IS, IS THAT GONNA REALLY SLOW DOWN, UH, WHAT WE DO AND HOW CAN WE MAKE THAT WORK QUICKLY, YOU KNOW, BY GETTING THEM DATA AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
BUT THAT'S MY CONCERN, IS THAT NOW WE TURN IT OVER AND THEN HOW LONG IS IT GONNA BE UNTIL IT COMES BACK? BUT WE WILL BE GOING THROUGH ALL THE CATEGORIES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED TONIGHT.
UH, WE WON'T BE DOING 'EM ALL AT THE FIRST MEETING.
THERE'LL PROBABLY BE OTHER MEETINGS.
WE'LL BE DEVOTING EVERY DESIGN REVIEW UNTIL THIS IS DONE.
AND WE MAY HAVE SOME SPECIAL MEETINGS, UH, CALLED TO JUST DISCUSS PARTICULARLY TOPICS, ESPECIALLY ABOUT, UH, SIDING AND WINDOWS.
'CAUSE THAT'S A BIG ITEM AS WELL AS ALL CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS AND STAIN AND YES.
AND REFERENCING, UM, THE PRESERVATION BRIEF 16 THAT, THAT TIM TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.
SO THERE'S A LOT THAT WE NEED TO ABSORB AND COMPARE TO WHAT WE DO NOW.
UM, BUT I THINK OVERWHELMINGLY WE LOOK DOWNTOWN AND AT NEIGHBORHOODS AND WE SAY WE, WE'VE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB FOR 44 YEARS.
AND SO WHAT'S HERE IS THE TESTAMENT TO WHAT WAS DONE.
AND SCOTT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT? UH, YES, SIR.
UM, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, THE, UM, I'VE BEEN REFLECTING ON THIS, UM, SPEAKING TO STAFF ABOUT THE SURVEY RESULTS AND, AND, AND TRYING TO THINK OF AN EASIER WAY FOR ALL OF US TO APPROACH SOLVING THESE VARIOUS PROBLEMS. BECAUSE WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU PRESENT THEM ALL IN A BIG BARREL, IT FEELS OVERWHELMING AND IT'S VERY EASY FOR US TO GET CONFUSED
[01:20:01]
OVER ENFORCEMENT ISSUES, RULES OF PROCEDURE ISSUES, AND DESIGN STANDARD ISSUES.AND IF IT CONFUSES US, IT IS 100% GOING TO CONFUSE THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
SO MY SUGGESTION TO YOU IS TO, TO, TO BREAK THESE INTO AT LEAST FOUR MAJOR CATEGORIES.
WE HAVE A PROJECT TO UPDATE THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
WE HAVE A PROJECT TO UPDATE THE RULES AND PROCEDURE WE HAVE ON THE STAFF SIDE.
UM, ISSUES REGARDING ENFORCEMENT.
AS CHAIR SAID, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN REALLY IMPACT.
UM, BUT WITH RESPECT TO ENFORCEMENT, WEBSITE, TECHNOLOGY, UM, ADAPTING THE FINISHED PRODUCT OF THE STANDARDS INTO A SEARCHABLE FORMAT, THAT THAT'S, THOSE ARE ALL STAFF ISSUES.
AND THEN THE FOURTH CATEGORY IN MY MIND, AND I'M I'M OPEN TO, TO OTHER IDEAS, IS A, A CATEGORY OF A MATERIALS REVIEW.
SO, SO TO ME, TO KEEP THIS SIMPLE, I SEE I SEE FOUR BIG ISSUES.
AND, UM, I WILL TELL YOU THAT, UM, AS TO MATERIALS, UM, THIS GO AROUND WILL BE AT LEAST THE THIRD TIME, MAYBE FOURTH, THAT I CAN SPECIFICALLY RECALL WHERE THE HPC HAS TACKLED THIS ISSUE OF MODERN MATERIALS.
EVEN THOUGH MY RECOLLECTION GOES BACK 35 YEARS, AND IT'S ALWAYS THE SAME ISSUE.
I WAS HERE WHEN PVC PRODUCTS CAME OUT AND HARDY PLANK WAS INTRODUCED AND, UM, FIVE V METAL ROOFING.
AND SO I'VE, I'VE LIVED ALL OF THIS WITH VHPC, AND IT'S, AND IT'S A, IT'S AN EXCELLENT PROCESS TO, TO REVISIT THIS AND SEE WHAT'S CHANGED.
STAINS ARE SOMETHING VERY NEW.
WE'RE ALL USED TO THE, THE OILS AND THE WATER REPELLENTS AND WATER SEALERS, BUT THE STAINS ARE A NEW THING.
SO THAT, THAT ENDED UP ITSELF IS ONE BIG TOPIC THAT IS GONNA MONOPOLIZE A LOT OF TIME AND PROBABLY GONNA REQUIRE SOME SPECIAL MEETINGS TO, TO TAKE A DEEPER DIVE.
BUT JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE AT LEAST FOUR CATEGORIES OF ISSUES DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CANNOT APPROACH THEM ALL SIMULTANEOUSLY.
STAFF AND I CAN INDEPENDENTLY GO TACKLE THE STAFF ISSUES NOW TOMORROW.
UM, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU AS TO THE, THE OTHER THREE ISSUES ON THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
UM, IN, IN AN EFFORT TO STREAMLINE YOUR THINKING IS START WITH A BRAIN DUMP AMONG THE COMMISSION INDIVIDUALLY ABOUT YOUR, YOUR ISSUES, THE, THE ONES THAT YOU'VE EXPERIENCED, HEARD ABOUT, LEARNED IN THE CHARETTES.
UM, MAKE YOUR LIST AND THEN COME TOGETHER MAYBE AS SOON AS YOUR NEXT MEETING WITH YOUR INDIVIDUAL LISTS AND, AND START DISCUSSING WHERE IS THEIR CONSENSUS ON, ON ISSUES THAT, THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
I HAVE A, A SUSPICION THAT WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU START THINKING ABOUT IT VERY SPECIFICALLY, WHAT FEELS LIKE A HUNDRED ISSUES MIGHT END UP BEING SIX, BECAUSE WE TALK ABOUT 'EM IN VERY BROAD TERMS. WE TALK ABOUT WE NEED INTENT SECTIONS IN THESE AND THAT, AND, AND THAT'S ALL GREAT, BUT THOSE THINGS DON'T REALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE WITH RESPECT TO WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
ALL OF YOU HAVE STRUGGLED THROUGH THE GUIDELINES BY NOW.
AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS WILL NOT CHANGE THAT THERE, THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO APPROACH THE LARGEST QUESTION OF IS THE PROJECT CONGRUOUS OR NOT.
AND THAT IS BY BREAKING IT DOWN INTO FUNDAMENTAL PIECES, THE FORM AND RHYTHM, THE SIZE AND SCALE, EVERY SET OF GUIDELINES APPROACHES THOSE BASIC CONCEPTS SO THAT YOU CAN THEN LEAD YOURSELF TO THE ULTIMATE ANSWER.
IS IT CONGRUOUS OR NOT? WHEN WE TACKLED THE GUIDELINE REWRITES, IT'S BEEN A LITTLE OVER EIGHT YEARS AGO, UM, WE REALLY TOOK A FRESH, MODERN APPROACH, WHAT WE THINK IS A MUCH MORE INTUITIVE APPROACH TO ANSWERING THAT LARGER QUESTION OF IS IT CONGRUOUS OR NOT? SO I PERSONALLY REALLY LIKE THE INTUITIVE NATURE OF HOW IT'S STRUCTURED.
UM, BUT LIKE ANY SET OF RULES, YOU DO YOUR BEST, YOU LIVE WITH THEM FOR A WHILE, AND THEN YOU START SEEING TRAPS, SHORTCOMINGS, PITFALLS, POOR WORD CHOICE.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE NOW.
WE, WE'VE, WE'VE TIGHTENED THE SCREW A LONG WAY.
IT CAN BE TIGHTENED MORE, BUT I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE YOU OR THE PUBLIC WITH THE IMPRESSION THAT WE ARE GONNA GO FIND A CONSULTANT TO
[01:25:01]
COME IN AND DRILL A NEW HOLE, GIVE US A NEW SCREW, AND NOW WE'RE GONNA HAVE AN AMAZING DOCUMENT THAT JUST MAKES THIS REALLY EASY, THAT PERSON DOESN'T EXIST, AND THAT PROCESS DOESN'T REALLY EXIST.UM, I BRAG ON YOU REGULARLY AS A COMMISSION BECAUSE I, IN MY WORLD, I SEE A LOT OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS AND, AND, AND NOT TO SLIGHT OUR, OUR, OUR NEIGHBORS IN EAST NORTH CAROLINA.
AND EVERYBODY DOES A A GOOD JOB.
I THINK YOU GUYS DO A PARTICULARLY GREAT JOB.
AND I HAVE JOKED THAT IF THERE WAS AN HPC OLYMPICS, I AM SURE YOU WOULD PODIUM IN THAT PROCESS ACROSS THE STATE.
NOW LOCALLY WITH THE BEATINGS YOU TAKE AND THE CRITICISM WE ALL GET, IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE LOSING.
I WILL SAY THAT IS KIND OF THE NATURE OF THIS PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S CHALLENGING.
WE'RE ASKING ONE GIANT QUESTION, IS IT CONGRUOUS OR NOT? AND IF YOU ARE WELL SCHOOLED IN THIS PROCESS, HOW YOU GET THERE AND THE RESULT YOU ACHIEVE IS GOING TO LOOK AND SOUND CRAZY BECAUSE YOU SIMPLY AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH ALL THE MOVING PARTS.
SO ALL OF THAT IS TO SAY, IF YOU WILL BRAIN DUMP BETWEEN NOW AND YOUR NEXT MEETING, THE THINGS IN THE, IN THE, IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT YOU THINK NEED SOME ADJUSTMENT.
LET'S TRY TO WALK AWAY IN FEBRUARY WITH A CONSOLIDATED LIST, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT HOW WE GO ABOUT ADDRESSING THAT.
AND IF WE CAN DO THE SAME PROCESS FOR THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, UM, I, I MIGHT NOT GIVE YOU THAT HOMEWORK FOR FEBRUARY, BUT YOU CAN CERTAINLY START NOW, BUT MAYBE BY MARCH, IF YOU'VE GOT PET PEEVES ISSUES, STUMBLING BLOCKS WITH THOSE RULES OF PROCEDURE, LET'S LET'S IDENTIFY THOSE AS WELL AND, AND GET 'EM TAKEN CARE OF.
THAT THAT IS A MUCH EASIER LIFT.
FIXING, FIXING SOME STEPS OR SOME PROCEDURES OR WHATEVER.
UM, AND THEN, UM, WHILE THAT'S HAPPENING, WE'RE GONNA BE DOING THE STAFF STUFF AND THEN MEETING BY MEETING, WE CAN TALK ABOUT HOW YOU WANT TO APPROACH THE MATERIALS ISSUE.
BUT I'D LIKE FOR ALL OF US TO GET SOME TRACTION ON THESE DESIGN STANDARDS BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT SOME GREAT RESOURCES AMONG YOURSELVES.
THESE TWO GENTLEMEN, TIM AND JIM, I'VE WORKED WITH FOR WELL OVER A DECADE, A LOT LONGER IN SOME CASES.
UM, WE HAVE DRAFTED RULES OF PROCEDURE TOGETHER.
WE HAVE DRAFTED THE CURRENT GUIDELINES TOGETHER.
UM, WE'VE GOT GREAT RESOURCES.
TRIP IS ALWAYS A SUCKER FOR HELPING OUT.
UM, SO BETWEEN STAFF AND YOU GUYS, WE, WE CAN LIFT A HEAVY LOAD.
AND, UM, I THINK ONCE WE START AND START SORTING OUT THE ISSUES, IT MIGHT LIFT OUR SPIRITS AND GIVE US SOME LIGHT IN THE TUNNEL WHERE WE CAN SEE, OH YEAH, THERE ARE SOME ISSUES HERE, BUT WE CAN TACKLE THESE.
AND THIS IS NOT, THIS IS NOT A QUESTION OF IF I WERE A DESIGN STANDARD, WHAT WOULD I BE? WE'RE NOT THERE.
UM, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY AND WE ARE ALWAYS AVAILABLE TO YOU FOR HELP AND THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO OVER THE DECADE, WHATEVER.
BUT UH, I THINK THAT KIND OF FITS WHAT I'VE ASKED YOU ALL TO GO CHAPTER BY CHAPTER.
WHAT POPS OUT OF YOU INCONSISTENT NEEDS CORRECTION, BRING THAT LONG LIST, MAYBE EXPANDED BEYOND, UH, CLARIFICATIONS AND MAKE IT, WHY DO WE DO THIS? AND THEN I THINK WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THAT AND READ IT, MY OWN TAKE IS THAT WHEN YOU READ THE NARRATIVE, IT REALLY IS WELL WRITTEN.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, ALSO LOOK AT IT, BUT THERE'S SOME THINGS IN THERE THAT, UH, YOU MIGHT SAY, WELL, WHY DO WE SAY IT THAT WAY? UM, BUT PLEASE JUST BRING AS MUCH AS YOU CAN TO THAT DESIGN REVIEW MEETING AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT ALL.
UH, AND HOW DOES IT SOUND? WE DO THOSE FOUR AND, UM, MR. CHAIR.
UM, BEFORE THE COUNSELOR STARTED TALKING, UM, I WAS GONNA SUGGEST I THINK LISTENING TO, UM, JESSICA'S REPORT TO ME, IT KIND OF FALLS INTO, INTO FIVE BUCKETS, NOT FOUR.
AND, AND, AND, AND I, I THINK THEY SORT OF ALIGN WITH WHAT, WITH WHAT SCOTT'S TALKING ABOUT.
AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE, UH, THE, THE, NOT ONLY THE MATERIALS, BUT ALSO INFRASTRUCTURES.
THAT THAT SEEMED TO BE COMING UP A LOT IF PEOPLE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT INFILLS.
AND THAT CERTAINLY PART OF, OF THE, OF THE STANDARDS TWO WOULD BE ENFORCEMENT.
THREE IS THE PROCESS, WHICH NOT ONLY IS OUR PROCEDURAL THINGS, BUT ALSO, UM, THE DBN WE HAVE, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE DBN, WHAT THAT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE.
I THINK THAT WOULD FALL INTO THAT BUCKET.
AND IN ADDITION TO THE MINORS THAT, THAT JESSICA BROUGHT UP AND THE WHOLE COA APPLICATION PROCESS.
AND THEN THE FOURTH ONE I THOUGHT WAS
[01:30:01]
COMMUNICATION.UM, I, I THINK AS YOU POINTED OUT, THERE WAS AN AWFUL LOT OF MISINFORMATION THAT CAME OUT DURING THE, THE, WE NEED TO FIND BETTER WAYS TO COMMUNICATE, TO, TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE DO, WHAT WE DON'T DO, YOU KNOW? AND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE NOW, BUT I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF, OF OUR, OF OUR UPDATE PROCESS.
AND THEN OF COURSE, THE LAST ONE, UM, IS KIND OF THAT PIECE THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
AND THAT IS, UM, THE, THE EASE OF USE, WHETHER THAT BE THE WEBSITE, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, MORE PICTURES, FLOW CHARTS, UM, UM, SCHEMATICS OR SOMETHING TO MAKE IT, UM, AN AN EASIER INFORMATION, AN EASIER PRODUCT FOR, FOR, FOR EVERYBODY TO USE.
AND SO TO ME IT IS KIND OF FIVE BUCKETS, BUT I THINK IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE PROCESS THAT THE, THAT THE ATTORNEY TALKED ABOUT AS, AS DID YOU, OKAY.
ANYBODY ELSE? WELL, WHEN WE, UH, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS EXERCISE IN 14, 15, 16, UH, WE DID A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF RESEARCH, UH, FOCUS MAINLY IN, IN NORTH CAROLINA, BUT ALSO LOOKED AT WHAT OTHER STATES WERE DOING.
AND WE PICKED WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS BEST OF BREED WAYS TO DO THINGS.
YES, WE, WE PLAGIARIZED WHAT OTHER FOLKS WERE DOING.
AND I WENT THROUGH AND LOOKED AT SOME OF THE, UM, SOME OF THE STANDARDS AND, AND, UH, PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS THAT, UH, HAVE RECENTLY COME OUT.
YOU'RE GONNA SEE OUR THINGS IN THERE.
THEY PLAGIARIZED US PEOPLE, PLAGIARIZED US, UM MM-HMM
I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THESE AND YOU WANT AN IDEA OF, WELL, OKAY, WHAT CAN WE DO DIFFERENTLY? IS THIS GOOD, BAD, ANOTHER WAY TO DO IT, WE LOOK AT SALISBURY, EDENTON, BEAUFORT, WILMINGTON, WASHINGTON, CARBORO, AND WILSON IS KIND OF THE, THE CITIES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO US.
'CAUSE IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LOOKING AT RALEIGH, AT AT RALEIGH, UH, WINSTON-SALEM, CHARLOTTE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, A A MUCH DIFFERENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I REMEMBER, I REMEMBER ONE OF THE ONLINE, UH, TRAINING SESSIONS WE HAD, THEY HAD SOMEONE FROM SAN FRANCISCO AND HE WAS TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY HAD, I THINK, 18 DIFFERENT HISTORIC PLANNERS.
AND I'M LIKE, YOU, YOU GOT NOTHING FOR US
SO JUST JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND.
UH, WE, WE, I THINK WE ALSO HAVE A UNIQUE SITUATION AND THAT WE ARE VERY HANDS ON WITH OUR HPC.
WE DON'T RELY ON A CONSULTANT TO COME IN AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WRITE SOMETHING.
WE, WE DO THAT AND WE'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL WITH THAT.
AND THE BIGGEST THING THAT WE GET OUT OF THAT IS WE GET A VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE AND WELL-TRAINED HPC OUT OF IT.
AND WE'VE GOT THE TALENT HERE, A LOT OF DIFFERENT SKILL SETS.
UH, I REALLY THINK THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE CAN MAKE THIS, UH, BETTER THAN WHAT WE'VE GOT RIGHT NOW.
SO, UH, MR. CHAIR, JUST TO, TO REITERATE.
SO WHAT ARE YOU ENCOURAGING AS HOMEWORK FOR EVERYBODY TO DO BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING? IT'S CHAPTER BY CHAPTER.
WHAT DO YOU THINK CAUSES YOU CONCERN OR POPS OUT CONCEPT, NOT REWORD CONCEPT.
SO YOU'RE NOT EXPECTING YOU TO RED LINE AND DRAFT, BUT JUST WHY, YOU MIGHT BE ASKING, WHY DO WE SAY THIS? AND THAT COULD BE A GOOD DISCUSSION.
WHY DO WE REQUIRE THIS, UM, TONIGHT? WHY DO WE REQUIRE LESS THAN 50% OF THE BACKYARD TO BE PAID? YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT STARTED THAT? IS 50 THE RIGHT NUMBERS? SHOULD IT BE 75? SHOULD IT BE 40? UM, YOU KNOW, WHY OR SHOULD IT BE INCLUDED AT ALL? YEAH.
AND I THINK, I THINK WORDING OF SOME OF THE THINGS, YOU KNOW, THE REALITY IS THAT WE COULD COME UP WITH WHAT WE THINK IS THE MOST PERFECT THING.
AND THEN SOME, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT WEEK SOMEONE'S GONNA COME UP WITH SOMETHING WE DIDN'T THINK OF, RIGHT? OR IT'S NOT GONNA BE WORDED PROPERLY, AND IT'S LIKE, AH, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE WITH WHAT WE'VE GOT.
SO FOCUS ON INTENT, I THINK OF THESE THINGS.
I THINK IT'S, IT'S DESIGN REVIEW.
WE'RE NOT VOTING ON A CHANGE IN STANDARDS.
WE ARE SIMPLY GETTING A CONSENSUS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE PLAN TO PUT IN THE NEW GUIDELINE UPDATE.
BUT WHETHER WE DO OR NOT IS DOWN THE ROAD AFTER WE'VE WRITTEN ALL OF IT AND SAY, WELL, DOES THIS STILL FIT WITH WHAT'S IN CHAPTER FOUR?
[01:35:01]
UM, BUT I THINK WE'RE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT.UM, ANYBODY ELSE? JOHN? WE'RE COUNTING ON
I WOULD ONLY ADD, UM, TO MAYBE TO START IS TO LOOK AT THE, UM, INTERIOR, UM, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS, THE ONE PAGE TRUE DOCUMENT FOR REHABILITATION.
THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT ONES.
SO YOU WANNA MAKE SURE YOU GET THE ONE FOR REHABILITATION.
UM, NOT TO SAY A PERSON COULDN'T DO A RESTORATION.
IN WHICH CASE NO ONE REALLY WANTS TO DO THAT EXCEPT FOR THE TRY ON PALACE.
AND, AND THAT WAY, AND THAT WAY IT PROVIDES A FOUNDATION FOR YOUR THINKING AS YOU START TO LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT, OR QUESTION THE THINGS THAT ARE IN THERE.
AND I'VE ASKED MATT TO BE SURE WHEN SOMEBODY GOES TO THE, CALLS HIM UP OUT OF THE BLUE AND SAYS, I WANT TO DO THIS.
AND IT, AS HE TELLS THEM WHAT THE GUIDELINE IS, AND I, I HAVE TO GO BACK TO MY BANKING DAYS, GOT A PHONE CALL ABOUT SO AND SO, WAS VERY RUDE TO ME ON THE PHONE.
WELL, WHAT, AND SHE WAS OUR BEST CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE, BANK CARD SELLER, YOU KNOW, HUNDREDS, HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE.
AND I SAID, WELL, WHAT DID SHE SAY? WELL, SHE, SHE SAID, I CAN'T GET MY MONEY BACK.
WELL, THAT'S KIND OF THE SAME REACTION HERE IS WHAT HE TOLD ME.
THIS THING THAT'S CONTRARY TO WHAT I WANTED TO DO.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE AREN'T WAYS TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO DO BY EITHER TALKING FURTHER WITH MATT, CHANGING YOUR PROJECT FOR COMING AND WASN'T LETTING US HEAR IT.
AND IT MAY BE SOMETHING WE CAN SAY, WELL, IF YOU DID THIS, UH, THAT YOU CAN RESUBMIT IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
UH, BUT EVERYBODY'S CAPABLE HERE.
NOW WITH THAT, ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE NEW BUSINESS SECTION? AND THANK YOU FOR COMING, JESSICA.
CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE SURVEY? UM, WE HAD, UH, WELL OVER HALF OF THE PARTICIPANTS WERE, UM, IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WORK LIVE OR ARCHITECTS, CONTRACTORS, ET CETERA.
IS THERE A WAY TO SEE WHAT THAT PARTICULAR GROUP'S RESPONSES WERE? IS THAT WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT ALREADY? YEAH, I WENT THROUGH AND LOOKED AT JUST THE PEOPLE THAT OWN IT.
[9. HPC ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT]
THAT, MATT, DO YOU WANT A REPORT? UH, THERE'S NO, NO PUBLIC HERE TO MAKE COMMENTS, RIGHT,UH, WE HAVE, UH, NO MAJOR COAS WERE DENIED IN THE REPORTING PERIOD, WHICH IS A TWO MONTH PERIOD SINCE, UH, WE DIDN'T HAVE A DECEMBER MEETING.
UH, THEN, UH, THREE MAJOR COAS WERE ISSUED, UH, PRIMARILY FROM THE NOVEMBER TIME PERIOD.
UH, AND THEN, UH, WE HAD, UM, THAT LIST OF MINOR COAS WERE ISSUED.
UH, WE HAVE ONE WAITING TO BE ISSUED SOON.
I RECEIVED SOME INFORMATION TODAY ABOUT THAT, SO IT COULD BE IN THE NEXT DAY OR TWO.
UM, AND THEN, UM, THERE 18 OTHER APPLICATIONS WHERE WE HAVE CONTACTED THEM AND WE'RE WAITING FOR INFORMATION FROM THOSE APPLICATIONS APPLICANTS.
UH, WE HAVE, UH, TWO PARTICULARLY NOTEWORTHY, UH, OTHER ITEMS. UH, WE HAVE A CASE IN OUR DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, UH, CASE WHERE, UH, ONE PROJECT HAS MET A, A SIGNIFICANT MILESTONE AT 7 26 P*****K STREET.
UH, AND, UH, THE, UM, HEARING WITH THE CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR HAPPENED AND THE DEADLINE WAS SET FOR COMPLETION OF THE WORK.
AND, UH, PARTICULARLY NOTEWORTHY IS THAT SOME OF THAT WORK WAS ALREADY IN PROGRESS AT THE TIME OF THAT MEETING.
SO THAT'S, UH, VERY, UM, PROMISING.
UH, THEN, UH, WE HAD ALSO A VERY, UH, WONDERFUL, UH, RESULT TO THE ONE CASE FOR 2 0 9 JOHNSON STREET, WHERE, UH, THE, UH, OWNERS, UH, DID ALL THE WORK AND CLOSED.
AND WE CLOSED THAT CASE IN, UH, DECEMBER.
SO, UM, THAT WAS, UH, ACTUALLY, UM, LIKE I SAID, VERY NOTEWORTHY AND, UM,
[01:40:01]
WELL DONE.AND I WILL POINT OUT THAT DEMOLITION, IF ANYONE'S LISTENING, DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, WHEN WE GET TO THE POINT OF TURNING IT OVER TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, IT IS HIS PROCESS FROM THERE ON OUT.
SO HE HOLDS THE HEARING, HE SETS THE SCHEDULE FOR MM-HMM
FIXING EVERYTHING AND, AND HAS THE BACK AND FORTH WITH THE CLIENT.
AND, AND ALSO AS WE, UH, NOTED, UM, PRIOR TO THAT, AS WE WERE DISCUSSING IT WITH THE APPLICANT, UM, OR THE OWNER AT THE TIME, UH, THAT IS NOT A, UM, UH, CONTENTIOUS PROCESS EITHER.
IT'S A, UM, IT'S A COOPERATIVE PROCESS.
UM, IT SOUNDS VERY, UM, VERY SERIOUS AND IT CAN BE IF YOU'RE NOT COOPERATIVE, BUT, UM, UH, SINCE THE OWNER WAS COOPERATIVE AND UH, UH, WAS LOOKING TO GET THINGS FIXED, ALSO, UM, IT WORKED OUT, UM, RATHER AMICABLY.
ANY OTHER GENERAL COMMENTS? ANYONE? MOTION TO ADJOURN? SECOND.
SO, UH, WHO MADE THE, UH, MOTION FOR ADJOURN? I SECONDED.
WHO MADE THE MOTION? GREGORY, DID I BELIEVE? PARDON ME? YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S FINE.
WE'LL CALL ROSS SOMEBODY, SOMEBODY TOSS A COIN.
AND THEN WHO DID HE MOTIONED AND SECOND HIMSELF? HE WON.