[00:00:01]
HAVE FIVE 30 I CALL TO ORDER THE JULY REGULAR MEETING OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.MR. SHELLEY, WOULD YOU TAKE THE ROLE, PLEASE? YES, CERTAINLY.
UH, MOLLY BALES IS ABSENT AT THE MOMENT.
ALRIGHT, MR. CHAIR, WE HAVE A FORUM.
[2. COMMISSION ELECTIONS]
THANK YOU.THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS COMMISSION ELECTIONS.
EVERY YEAR IN JULY, WE ELECT A CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN, AND I'LL JUST BRIEFLY SAY THE CHAIRMAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING THE MEETINGS IN A FAIR AND OPEN MANNER AND ENSURING THE HBC IS FOLLOWING ITS RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR MEETINGS AND FOR HEARINGS.
AND THEN THE VICE CHAIRMAN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SERVING HIS CHAIRMAN IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ELECTED CHAIRMAN AND ALSO HAVING A REFERENCE OF STATE STATUTES AND CITY ORDINANCES RELATED TO PRESERVATION MATTERS AT ALL MEETINGS.
AND I'M TOLD THE MEMBERS, I'M NOT STANDING FOR REELECTION.
SO WE DO NEED A NEW CHAIRMAN AND, UH, VICE CHAIRMAN.
SO WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE A NOMINATION FOR CHAIR? I RECOMMEND MIKE.
AND THEN FOR VICE CHAIRMAN, DO WE HAVE A NOMINEE? I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE JOHN SCHMID.
WE HAVE A NEW CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIRMAN.
MR. SMITH? UH, YOU CAN YOU RIGHT NOW? WE DON'T HAVE TO OR ANYTHING? YOU COULD GO FOR A BEER.
THAT'S RIGHT, JIM, WE'RE GONNA LEARN MORE OVER THERE.
IT IS GONNA BE WEIRD RIGHT? ABOUT THREE MINUTES AGO.
THAT'S WHAT YOU DID FOR BEING LATE.
WE'RE JUST WAITING IN THE HALLWAY THERE.
AND I THINK, UM, MY FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS, AND I THINK IT'S BE APPROPRIATE, IS TO THANK JIM MORRISON FOR, FOR BEING CHAIR FOR THE LAST YEAR.
UM, HE'S BEEN RESPONSIVE, HE'S BEEN THOUGHTFUL.
AND DESPITE HIS HIS CHOICE OF WHERE TO GO TO COLLEGE, I THINK HE HAS BEEN AN EXCELLENT CHAIR.
AND I THINK WE A ROUND OF APPLAUSE, PLEASE.
[4. CONSENT AGENDA]
UM, SO, UM, MATT, DO WE HAVE ANY ON THE, UM, UH, ANY ON MY CONSENT AGENDA? I GUESS I SHOULD ASK, ARE THERE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA BEFORE WE START? AWESOME.SO MATT, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS MEETING? WE DO, WE DO NOT.
[5.A. 748 E. Front St. (Queen’s Point) – to include replacement windows in a non-contributing structure in the Secondary and Tertiary AVCs.]
SO, UH, I GUESS WE'LL, WE'LL GO MOVE AHEAD ON THE, UH, HEARINGS ON THE COAS AND DO HAVE A PREPARED STATEMENT.UH, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION HOLDS QUOS THE JUDICIAL HEARINGS ON APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS KNOWN AS COAS.
THE COMMISSION HEARS SWORN TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, BY PARTIES WHO HAVE RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE HEARING AND BY OTHERS WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAVE RELEVANT, RELEVANT EVIDENCE AND ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE APPLICATION.
THE COMMISSION'S DECISION ON AN APPLICATION IS BASED SOLELY ON TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THE HEARING THAT DIRECTLY RELATES TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLE AND STANDARDS.
THE COMMISSION CANNOT CONSIDER COMMENTS BASED ON PERSONAL, PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES, HEARSAY OR PERSONAL OPINIONS THAT CANNOT BE DIRECTLY RELATED TO SPECIFIC HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS.
LIKEWISE, THE COMMISSION MEMBERS SHALL REFRAIN FROM STATING PERSONAL OPINION, PERSONAL LIKES OR DISLIKES
[00:05:01]
OR HEARSAY DURING THE MEETINGS.UM, GUESS THE FIRST THING TO DO WOULD BE TO SWEAR IN WITNESSES.
IF THERE'S ANYBODY HERE WHO PLANS TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE APPLICATIONS TONIGHT, CAN YOU COME UP TO THE FRONT OF THE, OF THE ROOM PLEASE? IF ANYBODY'S GONNA SPEAK ON ANY OF THE APPLICATIONS? IF YOU'RE AN OR REPRESENTATIVE, IF YOU'RE AN OWNER, REPRESENTATIVE OR SOMEONE STEP AT LEAST THREE.
IF YOU HAVEN'T, WHEN YOU SIGN IN AFTER YOU SWEAR IN, I'LL, BUT COULD YOU BOTH RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND OR ALL THREE? THANK YOU.
UM, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO THE BEST OF YOUR ABILITY TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH? I DO.
IF YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED IN, CAN YOU PLEASE SIGN IT? SO, MATT, WHICH ONE DID YOU SAY WAS GONNA BE LATE? WHICH FROM THE THIRD? THE THIRD? UH, OBJECTION.
YOUR SHOT FROM, FROM AVENUE A? NO, HE'S 26.
NO, WE MUST HAVE AN HAND THIS EVENING.
YOU FIND ONE? WHAT'S THAT? YEAH.
SO HERE'S THE PROCESS THAT WE'LL BE FOLLOWING FOR THE HEARING ON COA APPLICATIONS.
THE HPC ADMINISTRATOR WILL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE COA APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE WILL PRESENT THE APPLICATION AND ANSWER ANY CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS ASKED BY THE COMMISSIONERS.
THOSE WHO RECEIVE NOTICE MAY PRE PRESENT EVIDENCE, EITHER AS A PROPONENT OR AN OPPONENT, ANYONE ELSE WHO CAN JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAVE RELEVANT INFORMATION AND WILL BE A DIRECT AND WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED.
CAN PREVENT, CAN PRESENT EVIDENCE.
THE APPLICANT HAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL OF TESTIMONY GIVEN THEN THE HPC ADMINISTRATOR WILL PRESENT STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY FINAL COMMENTS ON THE APPLICATION.
THE COMMISSIONERS WILL DISCUSS THE EVIDENCE AND MAY ASK FOR CLARIFICATION FROM THE APPLICANT OR THE PRESENTERS.
I'LL THEN CALL FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE OR DENY THE APPLICATION WITH STATED FINDINGS OF FACT.
WE'LL DISCUSS THE MOTION AND THEN THE COMMISSION WILL VOTE ON THE MOTION.
AND FOLLOWING APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION, THE CHAIRMAN MAY CALL FOR A MOTION TO ISSUE THE COA AND THEN OF COURSE THE COMMISSION WILL VOTE ON THE MOTION.
UM, IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS ON THAT PROCESS, LET'S MOVE FORWARD TO THE FIRST HEARING, WHICH IS 7 48 EAST FRONT STREET.
SO 7 48 EAST FRONT STREET, UH, IS IN QUEENS POINT, AND THE PROJECT IS TO INCLUDE REPLACEMENT WINDOWS AND THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN THE SECONDARY AND TERTIARY ABCS.
UM, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICATION TO BE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE.
THE OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION OF REPRESENTATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED.
MR. PHIL JACKSON HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE OWNER.
UH, THE CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY, AND SO HAS THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS AT, UH, LINDSEY LO LOON.
UM, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS THOMAS BRUZ.
UH, THE LOCATION IS 7 48 EAST FRONT STREET.
THE STATUS OF THE STRUCTURE IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
IT WAS BUILT IN 1995, AND SO THEREFORE THERE'S NO NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY DESCRIPTION NOR A SAND BECK DESCRIPTION.
UH, AND IT IS LOCATED IN THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
SO HERE WE SEE SOME, UH, AERIALS OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL, UH, ONE A LITTLE BIT FARTHER OUT AND ONE ZOOMED IN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO THE SPECIFIC PARCEL.
UH, AND WE CAN SEE ON THE LEFT IS, UH, EAST FRONT STREET AND AT THE TOP IS QUEEN STREET.
UM, PART PARTLY TO NOTE IS THAT THE, UH, THE PARCEL, UH, IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT'S CALLED LANDLOCKED.
[00:10:01]
UM, BUT THEY HAVE AN ACCESS WAY ALONG THE, UH, SOUTHERN OR SOUTHEASTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH WE'LL SEE HERE IN A SECOND.SO, UH, LOOKING FROM THE STREET, UM, IT'S ESSENTIALLY THAT UNIT IN THE, ON THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
AND, UH, YOU CAN SEE IT HAS QUITE A FEW WINDOWS THERE.
UM, THIS, UH, IS THE, UH, UH, PART OF THE, THE PHOTOS THAT WERE SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION IN THE UPPER LEFT CORNER.
UM, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE.
IT'S A LITTLE SMALL, BUT THERE, YOU SEE THE SIDEWALK COMING OUT TO THE STREET.
THAT IS THE, UH, ESSENTIALLY THE WALKWAY THAT GOES TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING INTO THIS UNIT.
UM, AND ON THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER IS THAT WALKWAY LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE STREET.
SO IT'S NOT A VERY NARROW SPACE.
BUT, UH, AND THEN THE REST OF THE WINDOW, UH, THE REST OF THE PHOTOS SHOW THE VARIOUS, UM, UH, WINDOWS THAT ARE BEING REPLACED WITH THEIR NUMBERS.
YOU CAN'T SEE IT AT THIS SCALE, BUT, UM, IN YOUR PACKETS YOU COULD.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE BOTTOM ONE SHOWS, UH, THE BALCONIES, UM, ON THE BACKSIDE FACING THE RIVER WHERE THE, UH, REMAINING WINDOWS ARE.
AND THIS IS A SAMPLE OF THE INFORMATION THEY PROVIDED, SHOWING THE, UH, THE EXISTING WINDOWS.
AND THEN, UH, DESCRIBING THE NEW WINDOWS IN THIS PARAGRAPH AT THE TOP IN QUITE A BIT OF DETAIL.
AND EACH OF THE 11 WINDOWS HAS A SHEET FOR THAT, OR JUST LIKE THAT.
SO, UH, WE REQUEST THAT THE FULL PROJECT PACKET, WHICH INCLUDES THE APPLICATION INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, THE COMPLETED ZONING AND INSPECTIONS FORM, AND THE STAFF REPORT TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD.
DO WE NEED A VOTE FOR THAT? UH, AND THEN, UH, AT THIS POINT, THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE CAN, UH, COME UP AND, UH, MAKE A PRESENTATION IF THEY WOULD LIKE, IN ADDITION TO WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED.
CAN YOU COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND, AND SAY YOUR NAME, PLEASE? SURE.
AND YOU'RE REPRESENTING RIGHT? I AM.
SO YOUR COMPANY NAME THEN, TOO.
I'M A SALES MANAGER FOR RENEWAL BY ANDERSON IN CENTRAL NORTH CAROLINA.
UM, REPLACEMENT DIVISION OF ANDERSON WINDOWS.
UM, BUT THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
IT WAS NICE TO LOOK AROUND AT EVERYTHING.
UM, BUT, UM, BUT I WAS A LITTLE BIT LIKE I WAS EXPECTING, UM, A LITTLE BIT MORE QUESTIONS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER MEETING AFTERWARDS.
UM, BUT I WAS REALLY EXCITED BECAUSE I ACTUALLY HAVE A SAMPLE WINDOW OF WHAT IS GOING IN IN THIS HOME.
UM, AND AS SOMEBODY THAT GREW UP IN A TOWN THAT LIKE, KEEPS EVERYTHING THE SAME, IT WAS NICE TO DRIVE IN AND LIKE SEE THAT LIKE BP DIDN'T HAVE A HUGE BP SIGN.
SO I DIG WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING.
I, I, I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE THE RIGHT COMPANY, UM, BECAUSE I KNOW SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE IN HISTORICAL SOCIETIES AREN'T BIG FANS OF REPLACEMENT, UM, OR REPAIR.
UM, OR MAYBE REPAIRING, BUT ONLY THINKING ABOUT WOOD.
UM, AND, UM, WHAT WE OFFER, UM, I WANTED TO MAKE KNOWN IS A WOOD COMPOSITE WINDOW.
AND THIS THING LOOKS MORE BEAUTIFUL THAN ANYTHING ELSE A WOOD WINDOW COULD, COULD BE.
SO I WAS HOPING I COULD SHOW IT, UM, OR ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR MATERIAL TO HELP ANYTHING.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S JUST MORE PROCEDURAL.
UM, BUT, UM, I'M HERE FOR YOU IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
I GOT PIECES AND STUFF TO SHARE IF YOU'RE INTERESTED.
AS, AS, AS THE MEMBERS KNOW, THIS, UH, WAS BUILT IN 1995 AND IT'S NOT A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
AND SO THE, THE SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS OBVIOUSLY FOR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES ARE NOT THE SAME.
WHICH, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
SO I JUST, I DON'T WANT TO DAMPEN YOUR ENTHUSIASM.
BUT, UM, BUT, BUT IT, IT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT PROCESS FOR A NON-CONTRIBUTING A NEW STRUCTURE THAN AN OLD.
UM, BUT DO YOU WANNA DESCRIBE BRIEFLY, 'CAUSE I KNOW YOU, YOU HAVE COMPOSITE WINDOWS.
DO YOU WANNA JUST TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT THE MATERIALS AND, AND I'M NOT SURE WE NEED A SHOW AND TELL UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO SEE IT
SO, MR. CHAIR, REAL QUICK, IT, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS IS TO ASK WHETHER OR NOT THAT MATERIAL WAS AVAILABLE IN 1995 OR NOT.
UM, THE MATERIAL THAT WE MAKE OUR WINDOWS OUT OF THE COMPOSITE MATERIAL, UM, WAS DEVELOPED IN THE 1970S, HIT THE MARKET IN 19 93, 19 93.
AND WHERE RENEWAL BY ANDERSON WAS BIRTHED WAS, UM, UM, KIND OF LIKE A GOAL TO MAKE IT LESS RISKY TO REPLACE WINDOWS.
WE NOT ONLY MAKE IT, WE INSTALL IT, WE OWN THE WHOLE PROCESS, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN A LOT OF OTHER COMPANIES.
AND THAT'S WHEN MY COMPANY WAS FOUNDED.
SO, BUT THE ANDERSON NAME GOES BACK TO 1905.
BUT YOU GUYS DON'T NEED A HISTORY LESSON IN HOW AWESOME WE ARE.
SO YOU WANNA JUST TALK BRIEFLY? YEAH.
SO VIEX WHAT IT IS, IT'S 40% WOOD AND 6% THERMAL POLYMER.
UM, WE'VE, WITH HEAT AND PRESSURE, WE EXTRUDED OUT A MACHINE.
UM, ALL OF THAT ACTUALLY IS MADE IN MINNESOTA
[00:15:01]
IN THE SAME FACTORY, SAME FOOTPRINT THAT WE STARTED MAKING WINDOWS IN, IN 1905.SO WE'RE REALLY PROUD OF OUR HERITAGE.
WE'RE STILL PRIVATELY OWNED FROM THE ANDERSON FAMILY TOO.
SO IN TERMS OF HERITAGE AND HISTORY OF AMERICA, WE ARE THERE.
UM, BUT UM, BUT WE MAKE THE WINDOWS, UM, WE MAKE THEM ALL IN MINNESOTA.
UM, THE BENEFITS OF FX IS THAT IT CAN'T ROT, IT CAN'T SHIP, IT CAN'T PEEL, IT DOESN'T DO A LOT OF THE THING, THE SAME THINGS THAT LIKE A VINYL WINDOW DOES, WHICH HAS A LITTLE BIT OF THE MAINTENANCE FREE PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, THAT WOOD WINDOWS HAVE, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S LIKE REALLY VINYL AND WOOD IS WHAT'S OUT THERE.
BUT ANDERSON ACTUALLY INVENTED VINYL WINDOWS.
UM, AND WE WALKED AWAY FROM IT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T FIND THAT IT WAS SUITABLE FOR LONG-TERM FIXES.
UM, NO OFFENSE TO PEOPLE WITH VINYL WINDOWS.
UM, I ALSO HAVE VINYL WINDOWS IN MY HOME.
UM, BUT UM, BUT I KNOW HOW BAD IT IS.
UM, SO IT KIND OF LED ANDERSON ON A QUEST TO FIND SOMETHING THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE SUSTAINABLE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.
'CAUSE WOOD WAS KIND OF RUNNING OUT, SO WE NEEDED TO FIND SOMETHING ELSE THAT WAS DIFFERENT.
BUT ALSO WE NEEDED SOMETHING THAT WAS MAINTENANCE FREE BECAUSE NOBODY LIKES TO DO MAINTENANCE.
IT KIND OF INVENTED FX TO FIX ALL THE PROBLEMS PEOPLE HAVE WITH WINDOWS.
UM, SO WHEN WE DEVELOPED IT THROUGH THE SEVENTIES AND THE EIGHTIES, WE PROTOTYPED IT IN SOME OF OUR PRODUCTS.
WE NEVER TEST ON CONSUMERS, BUT WE, UM, TESTED ON OUR OWN PEOPLE AND, UM, WE'VE YANKED THEM OUT OF PEOPLE'S HOMES, UH, OF PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR THE ANDERSON IN MINNESOTA EVERY 10 YEARS AND CHECKED THEM.
AND WE'RE ON OUR THIRD TRY OF THAT.
AND THEY'RE STILL WORKING GREAT.
IT DOES LEAD US TO THE BEST WARRANTY OF ANY OTHER WINDOW COMPANY OUT THERE BECAUSE OF HOW WE DO BUSINESS AND THE MATERIAL THAT IT'S MADE.
BUT IT PROVIDES A WINDOW WITH THE SAME PROFILE AND THE SAME LIKE BEZEL.
LIKE IF YOU THINK ABOUT LIKE A PHONE, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE EDGE OF A PHONE.
UM, ACTUALLY I HAVE A, UH, HISTORIC WINDOW SASH IN MY, IN MY CAR DOWNSTAIRS.
AND, UM, I WAS GONNA BRING IT, BUT I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE TOO MUCH.
BUT IT ACTUALLY HAS THE SAME FRAME, LIKE SAME SIZE FRAMING ALL AROUND THE GLASS.
SO SAME GLASS RATIOS, SAME SASH RATIOS OF OLD SCHOOL WOOD WINDOWS.
AND NOT A LOT OF OTHER COMPANIES CAN PROVIDE THAT IN LIKE A VINYL OR EVEN A WOOD WINDOW THAT'S CLADDED, WHICH YOU HAVE SOME IN THIS BUILDING ACTUALLY.
I DO HAVE PIECES IF YOU GUYS WANNA PUT IT IN YOUR HAND.
UM, BUT, UM, AGAIN, I'M A LITTLE PASSIONATE AND STRANGE.
UM, COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF, OF THE APPLICANT ON THIS? ON THE, ABOUT WINDOWS OR ABOUT THIS PROJECT? DID YOU HAVE THE PROTOCOL WITH YOU OR, I DO HAVE A WINDOW WITH ME.
SO THEIR WINDOW IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
UM, IF YOU HAD NOTICED THE PICTURES, UM, THEIR TOP STES HAVE A COLONIAL PATTERN, A THREE BY TWO.
UM, THE WINDOW THAT I HAVE IS THE SAME COLOR, UM, BUT IT IS, UH, A TWO BY TWO, UH, COLONIAL PATTERN.
SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, BUT IT'S A TOP SASH AND BOTTOM SASH LEFT CLEAR.
UM, WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT IS BEING PUT IN ON FRONT STREET OR EAST FRONT STREET.
SO SAME STASH ON TOP AND THEN SAME SASH ON THE BOTTOM.
BUT THE REASON I WANTED TO KIND OF BRING THIS WINDOW IS THAT SOMETIMES OUR WHITE IS KIND OF PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE BECAUSE SOMETIMES PEOPLE PAINT LIKE THEIR TRIM, LIKE A EURO WHITE, BRIGHT WHITE.
BUT ACTUALLY ONE THING THAT'S KIND OF COOL ABOUT ANDERSON, WE'VE KIND OF KEPT THE SAME COLOR AND OUR COLORS ARE SO OLD THEY GO BACK TO LET IT PAINT.
SO IF I WERE TO ABLE TO HAVE A THIRD ARM AND TAKE THIS PIECE OF PAPER AND PUT IT UP HERE, YOU'D SEE THAT THIS IS LIKE A LITTLE TIMELESS.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT OLDER LOOKING THAN A REGULAR EURO BRIGHT WHITE.
AND THIS IS THE SAME COLOR THAT WOULD BE IN THE HOME ON THE INSIDE AND THE OUTSIDE.
BUT I NOTICED YOUR HARDWARE ISN'T BLACK IN THE NO, NO.
THIS ONE ACTUALLY, THIS ONE'S KIND OF WILD.
THEY, THIS IS SHOW WINDOWS, SO THEY KIND OF WANT TO SHOW EVERYTHING THAT THEY CAN DO.
THEY DO HAVE THE RECESS HAND LIFT, WHICH IS THE THING AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT THERE.
IT'S WHITE AND THEIR HARDWARE IS WHITE, SO IT MATCHES.
BUT WE CAN DO STUFF IF YOU LIKE, WANT TO TALK OTHER STUFF IN HOMES.
SO, SO YOU SAID THE ONE THAT'S GONNA BE REPLACING IS NOT THE TWO OVER TWO, THE FOUR OVER ONE.
SO IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT, IT'LL BE A SIX SIX OVER ONE.
UM, YEAH, THREE OVER TWO SIX, YEAH.
YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY, THE COMPANY CALLS IT SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
SOME PEOPLE CALL IT TWO THREE WIDE.
BUT YEAH, IN THE SAME PATTERN.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS OF, OF UH, OF, UH, MR. JACKSON? ALL RIGHT.
ARE THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HAS RECEIVED NOTICE, UM, OF THIS PROJECT? WHO WOULD CARE TO COMMENT? IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO THINKS THEY HAVE RELEVANT INFORMATION AND MAY HAVE STANDING IN THIS MATTER? ALL RIGHT.
UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY REBUTTAL NECESSARY.
UM, SO, BUT YOU MAY WANT TO, AFTER, UM, MATT DOES HIS, UM, STAFF'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED AT THAT POINT.
PLEASE DON'T HOLD MY STRANGENESS AGAINST THIS HOMEOWNER.
ALRIGHT, SO, UH, UH, WE NO LONGER DO THE FULL STAFF REPORT, UH, 'CAUSE WE JUST, UH, ENTERED IT INTO THE RECORD.
[00:20:01]
UH, ONE POTENTIAL ISSUE TO BRING UP, AND THAT WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE GRILLS.IF THEY'RE THREE DIMENSIONAL, UH, AND NOT FLAT, MAYBE OUR, UH, UH, REPRESENTATIVE COULD COME BACK HERE AND ANSWER THAT ONE FOR US.
YEAH, ACTUALLY I BROUGHT A GRILL.
UM, JUST THE, THE SHARE WHAT LOOKS LIKE COMING TO BRING IT UP, THAT'S THE, UH, THAT'S THE ONE IN BETWEEN THE, IN BETWEEN THE, YEAH.
UM, SO, UM, THE WAY THAT THE PROJECT WAS BUILT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE THE ONES ON THE OUTSIDE AND THE INSIDE.
SO THE WAY THAT THIS PROJECT IS BUILT, AND SHAME ON OUR PERMITTING COMPANY THAT IS A VENDOR, UM, BUT WE SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THIS, WE WILL BE ADDING THIS TO THE OUTSIDE OF THEIR WINDOWS.
THEY CURRENTLY DO HAVE A GRILL BETWEEN THE GLASS, WHICH IS, WHICH ACTUALLY IS, UM, I HAVE AN IMAGE OF IT, WHICH ISN'T FLAT.
IT'S UM, I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES YOU SEE 'EM IN AND THEY'RE LIKE JUST A PIECE OF PLASTIC IN A THING.
OURS HAVE A BEVEL TO IT, THE ONES BETWEEN THE GLASS.
BUT WITH, UM, WITH THEIR ORDER, WE'RE GONNA BE ADDING ACTUALLY A PHYSICAL GRILL, UM, TO THEIR WINDOWS, WHICH IS MADE AT A FIREX TOO.
SO THEY'LL HAVE THE OUTSIDE AS WELL.
I CAN'T REALLY SEE THAT IN THERE, BUT THERE A PROFILE ON THAT.
COULD I APPROACH? YEAH, OF COURSE.
MR. JACKSON, CAN YOU LEAVE YOUR BUSINESS CARD SOMEWHERE? SURE.
ARE, ARE THESE PAINTABLE? THEY ARE PAINTABLE.
UM, WE HAVE A, A REALLY GREAT COLOR WARRANTY.
UM, SOMETIMES WHEN YOU GET LIKE SOME STRANGE COLORS, LIKE YOU HAVE TO PAINT THEM, BUT THEY ARE PRETTY COOL, RIGHT? YES.
YEAH, WE GOT, IT'S JUST A SMALL PIECE.
I'M A GUY
KIND OF EXPLAINED MY, MY STEP, SO I, I'D FORGOTTEN, MATT, THAT YOU DON'T GO THROUGH THE FULL REPORT ANYMORE.
AND IS THIS YOUR ONLY POTENTIAL OR ANY COMMENT? YES.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS, ON THIS PROJECT? NO.
SO WE'RE UP TO HPC DELIBERATION.
SO MR. JACKSON, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? MR. JACKSON, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR ARE YOU GOOD? NO.
COMMISSIONERS, UM, DISCUSSION THOUGHTS SEEMS TO THAT IT'S THE RIGHT, UH, MATERIAL FOR THE TIME IT WAS THERE.
THE MATERIAL WAS AVAILABLE WHEN THEY WERE BUILT.
UH, THESE ARE SECONDARY AND TERTIARY ONLY AREAS, WHICH IS ALSO ANOTHER ISSUE THAT, UH, WE DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
AND, AND IT'S THE SAME WINDOW PATTERN THAT, UH, IS THERE THAT THEY'RE, THAT THEY'RE REPLACING WITH THE EXACT SAME WINDOW PATTERN.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, CAN I, UH, HAVE A MOTION? UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE FIND THE APPLICATION FOR, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 7 48 EAST FRONT STREET TO BE NOT INCONGRUOUS WITH NEW BERN'S CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTION 15 DASH FOUR 11 TO 15 DASH 4 29 AND NEW BERN'S HISTORIC DIS DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS.
UH, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS AND FINDINGS OF FACT, UM, I WOULD LIKE, AS FAR AS APPLICABLE STANDARDS, I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THE LIST OF STANDARDS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
UH, FOR FINDINGS OF FACT, I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT THE FINDINGS OF FACT FROM STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND THEN FOR CONDITIONS, I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT THE LIST OF CONDITIONS AS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
WERE THOSE, WERE THOSE BOTH OF THE, OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE, UM, IN THE REPORT, YOU'D LIKE TO DO BOTH OF THOSE? CORRECT.
COULD I GET A MOTION FOR ISSUING A COA? SO MOVED.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE APPLICATION AND A COA FOR THAT PROJECT.
RICHARD WAS, CONGRATULATIONS AND THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SHOW AND TELL.
WHAT'S THAT? ALL SET? YOU'RE ALL SET.
[5.C. 406 Avenue A – to include demolishing a storage building (after-the-fact) and add a new accessory storage building in the Tertiary AVC.]
OUR NEXT HEARING IS 4 0 6[00:25:01]
AVENUE A.UM, MATT, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW? SURE.
SO FOR 4 0 6 AVENUE A, THIS IS A, UH, PROJECT TO INCLUDE DEMOLISHING A STORAGE BUILDING, UM, AFTER THE FACT AND ADD A NEW ACCESSORY STORAGE BUILDING IN THE TERTIARY.
A B, C STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICATION TO BE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE.
UH, OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION OF REPRESENTATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED.
JASON HOLTON, WHO I BELIEVE IS STANDING BEFORE US OF SOUTHERN HOMES, HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE OWNER, CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR, AND THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR HAVE REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
UM, SO THE APPLICANT IS, UH, MR. HOLTON.
UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER IS MARK AND BETH DEBIAN.
AND THE LOCATION IS FOUR SIX AVENUE.
A, UH, STATUS IS THAT THE HOME IS CONTRIBUTING, BUT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS TO BE DETERMINED BY YOU THIS EVENING.
UH, NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY, DESCRIPTION OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OF THERE IS NONE.
AND BECK DESCRIPTION OF THERE IS NONE.
AND THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IS THE TIGHT WEAVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
WE HAVE, UH, AERIALS, UH, OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL, AGAIN FROM A FARTHER OUT VIEW AND THEN CLOSE UP.
UM, YOU CAN SEE PAST STREET IN THE UPPER RIGHT ON THE UPPER ONE AND AVENUE A ALONG THE, UH, DIAGONALLY ACROSS THE BOTTOM.
AND THEN, UH, CLOSER IN YOU CAN BEGIN TO SEE THE, UH, NOW FORMER, UH, UH, ACCESSORY BUILDING IN THE UPPER LEFT CORNER OF THE PROPERTY, IN THE BACKYARD, UH, THROUGH THE TREES THERE.
UH, AND THEN WE HAVE THE STREET VIEW IMAGE OF THE HOUSE TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE THAT THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE GOES WITH.
AND THE ACCESSORY BUILDING OF HORSES IN THE BACK CANNOT BE SEEN IN THE STREET VIEW IMAGES.
SO THESE WERE PHOTOS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, UM, AND GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE CHARACTER OF THE, OF THE STRUCTURE AT THAT TIME.
AND THIS IS OF COURSE, BEFORE THEY STARTED THEIR, UM, REHAB OF THE, OF THE STRUCTURE AND DISCOVERED, UM, SOME VERY SERIOUS, UH, DETERIORATION, UM, ON THE, OF THE STRUCTURE SUCH AS THIS, UH, CORNER POST HERE.
UH, OR THIS, YES, THIS, UH, UH, ROOF RAFTER OR EVEN, UH, THIS ENTIRE SECTION OF THIS SIDE HERE.
UH, UH, BELIEVE THIS MAY BE ALL THE PHOTOS THAT THEY HAVE OF THIS DETERIORATION BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T ANTICIPATING NEEDING TO TAKE PICTURES OF EVERYTHING AT THE TIME.
UH, THEN, UH, WE RECEIVED TODAY THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, UM, WHICH, UH, SHOWS THE ENTIRE SITE HERE ON THE LEFT AND THEN A, UH, ZOOM IN ON THE PORTION WHERE THE STRUCTURE WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, SHOWING A 13 BY 15 WORKSHOP, UH, THREE FEET AWAY FROM, FROM BOTH PROPERTY LINES, THE SIDE AND THE REAR, AND, AND MORE THAN EIGHT FEET, UH, DISTANCE TO THE, UH, TO THE HOUSE, TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
SO THAT IS COMPLIANT WITH OUR REQUIREMENTS.
UH, THEN, UH, THEY ALSO PROVIDED NOW A REVISED, UH, DESIGN FOR THE BUILDING SINCE IT'S A LITTLE SMALLER THAN THE LAST TIME YOU SAW, UH, AS THEY EVEN MENTIONED, I BELIEVE, DURING THAT MEETING.
UH, SO, UH, HERE WE HAVE THE REVISED DESIGN.
UM, SO PRIMARILY WE HAVE, UM, THE ROOF PITCH IS FIVE AND 12.
IT HAS ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLES ON IT.
THE SIDING IS NOW HARDY, SMOOTH LAP SIDING, UH, AND HAS APPROPRIATE TRIM.
UH, THE DOUBLE DOORS ARE SIX FEET WIDE AND THE, UH, WINDOWS, THERE'S TWO OF 'EM THERE.
UH, AND LET'S SEE, WE DON'T HAVE A MATERIAL FOR THOSE.
I GUESS YOU, UM, UH, MR. HOLTON CAN ADVISE US ON THAT.
UH, IT'S GOING TO BE SITTING ON A CONCRETE SLAB AND THERE IS A LIGHT, UH, CENTERED OVER THE DOORWAY ON THE FRONT.
SO, AND WE HAVE SOME, UH, THE ELEVATIONS AND EVEN AN OBLIQUE, UH, IMAGE HERE AS WELL, PLUS THE, ALL THE VARIOUS DIMENSIONS, UH, PRIMARY DIMENSIONS FOR THIS.
UH, I BELIEVE THAT'S EVERYTHING THAT'S SHOWN ON HERE.
SO, UM, AGAIN, UH, WE REQUEST THAT THE FULL PROJECT PACKET, WHICH INCLUDES THE APPLICATION INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, THE COMPLETED ZONING AND INSPECTIONS FORM, AND THE STAFF REPORT TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD.
AND SO THE APPLICANT HAS THANK YOU MR. SHELLEY PRESENTATION.
UM, SO YOU'VE HEARD WHAT MATT SAID, YOU OF COURSE SUBMITTED THE INFORMATION.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT IN THE APPLICATION
[00:30:01]
OR ABOUT THE PROJECT? UM, NO, I THINK IT'S PRETTY WELL, YOU KNOW, SELF-EXPLANATORY.IF, UH, THEY HAD SAID BEFORE THEY LIKE TO SEE STANDING SCENE MM-HMM
UH, METAL ROOFING, UM, FOR THE HISTORIC PART.
UM, AND THEN I SPOKE WITH SHELLY TODAY AND HE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT I COULD DO THE SHINGLES, UM, IF THEY DO DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD AND, YOU KNOW, WE, WE GET IT APPROVED THIS WAY WITH THE SHINGLES.
CAN WE STILL PUT THE METAL ON THERE? WILL THAT CAUSE A PROBLEM? IT'S NOT GONNA CAUSE A PROBLEM.
AND, AND IT, IT WOULD REPLACING ONE, UM, NOT INCONGRUOUS MATERIAL WITH ANOTHER, WHICH I THINK IS OKAY.
SO IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO THE, UM, TO THE APPLICATION.
THAT'S PROVIDING ADDITIONAL, THAT'S PROVIDING, YEAH.
THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL APPLICATION, NO ADDITIONAL FEE.
JUST AN EMAIL AND THEN I'LL BE REQUIRED TO FIND OUT WHAT ALL THE APPROPRIATE INFORMATION IS FOR THE METAL ROOFING.
SO THAT IT IS INDEED COMPLIANT IN THE END.
WE HAVE A COUPLE LITTLE, LITTLE DETAILS.
ARE THE WINDOWS ORIGINAL FROM THE OLD, UH, OLD? UH, NO, THERE'LL BE, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION.
I THINK YOUR APPLICATION'S VERY NICE AND, UH, WELL THOUGHT OUT AND WELL DRAWN.
SO, SO THE, YOU SAID THIS CAN BE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER AND I'M, I'M ASSUMING THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS? YES, YES.
BUT YOU'RE GONNA, YOU'RE USE THE SAME PAD, THE SAME CONCRETE PAD, YOU'RE JUST NOT GONNA USE THREE FEET OF IT? OR ARE YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO POUR A NEW PAD? NO, WE'RE GONNA USE THE EXISTING CONCRETE PAD.
JUST CUT THREE FOOT BACK OKAY.
OR WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET THE THREE FOOT FROM THE, FOR THE SETBACK.
UH, COMMISSIONER, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MR. HOLTON? WELL, I GUESS WE, WE REALLY NEED TO START WITH THE DELIBERATION ON YES.
I JUST WANT TO GET ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
UM, SO AS, AS, AS, AS, UM, COMMISSIONER MORRISON AND JUST POINTED OUT AS YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THIS IS A, A DEMOLITION, THERE'S REALLY, THIS IS A TWO PART KIND OF DELIBERATION.
THE FIRST ONE IS ON THE DEMOLITION, AND THEN OF COURSE THE SECOND PART IS THE REDEVELOPMENT.
AND SO, UM, THIS, BUT WHILE YOU'RE THERE, IS THERE ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS YOU HAVE ON THE APPLICATION BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? 'CAUSE IT IS A TWO STEP PROCESS.
WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE DEMO AND THEN WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE, THE NEW PROJECT.
SO, UM, AS, AS, AS MR. MORRISON TALKED ABOUT, THIS IS A TWO STEP PROCESS.
THE FIRST PROCESS IS TO TALK ABOUT THE DEMOLITION.
AND, AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CONSIDERATIONS TO, TO THINK ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, UH, DEMOLITION.
THE FIRST IS WHETHER IT IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, WHICH IS PRETTY PRIMARY.
UM, AND THEN OF COURSE THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE ATTEMPTED PRESERVATION EFFORTS.
HOWEVER, IF IT TURNS OUT TO BE NON-CONTRIBUTING, THEN A LOT OF THE OTHER THINGS FALL AWAY.
AND IT REALLY, SO IT'S, I THINK THE NEXT DISCUSSION NEEDS TO BE ABOUT WHETHER THE STRUCTURE WAS, IT'S AS, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALREADY BEEN TORN DOWN, BUT WAS IT A CONTRIBUTING STAND STRUCTURE, UM, BEFORE IT WAS BUILDING? WELL, I, I'D ASSERT THAT IT IS MORE THAN 50 YEARS OLD, BUT IT WAS NEVER LISTED IN THE RIVERSIDE DISTRICT INVENTORY.
IT HAS, IN MY OPINION, NO HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OR AN INDIVIDUAL OR AN EVENT.
AND SO WE ALSO HAVE TO RECOGNIZE IT'S ALREADY DEMOLISHED, WHICH, YEAH.
ALTHOUGH YOU CAN'T USE THAT AS A, AS A FACTOR REALLY.
NO, BUT, BUT IT IS A, IT'S A VIOLATION OF YES, IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION IF IT WAS DONE.
BUT I, I, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER GOING TO SHIPPO FOR THIS.
I THINK WE CAN DETERMINE QUITE READILY THAT IT DOES NOT, THAT IT IS A CONTRIBUTING A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
OTHER, OTHER THOUGHTS? I CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER MORRISON.
THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT THAT IS CONTRIBUTING IN LOOKING, LOOKING AT THE CONSIDERATIONS, UH, FOR EVALUATING IT AT, UH, DEMOLITION OF THE STRUCTURE.
UH, IS IT A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE? UM, IT'S, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, INVENTORY LIST FOR 4 0 6 AVENUE A PAGE SEVEN.
UH, THE, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS NOT EVEN MENTIONED.
UH, IS IT SIGNIFICANT FOR ITS HISTORIC USE AND EVENT PERSON, BUILDER OR ARCHITECT? UH, I DON'T THINK IT MEETS THAT, UH, IS THE LAST OR THE OLDEST EXAMPLE OF A CERTAIN TYPE OF BUILDING.
UH, THERE ARE A LOT OF THESE GARAGES AND RIVERSIDE AS, AS
[00:35:01]
WELL AS DOWNTOWN.SO I JUST DON'T THINK IT, IT MEETS THE STANDARD, UH, MEETS, MEETS THE BAR AS FAR AS EVEN CONSIDERING A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
SO, NO, I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE INVENTORY WAS DONE IN 1988, AND IF THIS WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1950, THAT AT THE TIME IT WOULD'VE ONLY BEEN 38 YEARS OLD.
SO THE 50 YEARS HAS GONE OBVIOUSLY SINCE THE, THE INVENTORY LIST AS A MATTER OF RECORD, IT APPEARS ON THE 1931 SAMPLE NET.
AND, AND AS, AS A WHAT? AS AN AUTO HOUSE? AS AN AUTO HOUSE, OKAY.
UM, I, I, I, I LIVED AT, UH, 4 0 4 AVENUE A, SO I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SHED.
I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, STRUCTURAL MEMBERS.
I WOULD SAY IT'S PROBABLY, IT WAS PROBABLY CONSTRUCTED IN THE THIRTIES OR FORTIES AND 20, I DON'T KNOW, 20 OUT OF 20 10, 20 12, SOMEWHERE ALONG THERE.
UH, IT WAS HEAVILY RENOVATED BECAUSE OF TERMITE DAMAGE AT THAT POINT.
SO IT'S, IT'S, EVEN IF IT, EVEN IF YOU LOOKED AT IT AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, IT'S BEEN HEAVILY ALTERED ON THE EXTERIOR, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK IT MEETS, MEETS THE STANDARDS FOR, UH, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
WITH THAT IN MIND, ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT? UM, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE A MOTION FOR SOMEONE TO SUGGEST THAT IT IS NON-CONTRIBUTING AND THAT DEMOLITION OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, UM, WOULD BE APPROVED.
UH, IN CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION OF A SHED AT 4 0 6 AVENUE A, I CONSIDER THAT TO BE, UH, A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE APPLICATIONS TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION AND REDEVELOPMENT OF A SHED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY REQUIRING DE DELIBERATIONS ON DEMOLITION SPECIFIED IN THE DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS FOR DELIBERATION ONE AND MOVE THAT WE FIND THE SUBJECT STRUCTURE IS NOT LISTED IN THE RIVERSIDE NATIONAL REGISTER INVENTORY IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE.
AND THE HPC HAS DETERMINED THERE IS NO ARCHITECTURAL CULTURAL OR HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT REGARDING STATEMENT OF REASON, STATEMENTS OF REASON FOR DELIBERATION.
ONE I A SECOND, SECOND, ALL IT'S BEEN MOVED.
AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE WE CALL FOR THE VOTE? ALL, UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
SO WE HAVE THE, THE DEMOLITION PORTION OF THE, OF THE APPLICATION AND NOW WE CAN MOVE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE, OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO I THINK EVERYTHING YOU HAD SAID SO FAR, MR. HOLTON STILL HOLDS.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON MR. HOLTON ON THE REDEVELOPMENT ON THE NEW PROJECT? SO VINYL WINDOWS HOWDY BOARD, UH, IS THAT WHERE YOU'RE HEADED? YES, SIR.
MAYBE, MAYBE ASPHALT, MAYBE STANDING SCENE.
NOW THERE'S A QUESTION, UM, AND UM, MAYBE THE ATTORNEY CAN HELP.
CAN WE APPROVE AN APPLICATION WITH TWO DIFFERENT TYPE OF MATERIALS OR DO WE HAVE TO APPROVE WHAT WAS IN THE APPLICATION? YOU ARE APPROVING THE APPLICATION THAT IS, IS BEFORE YOU AS, AS SUBMITTED.
RIGHT? THAT'S BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
SO THE APPLICANT CAN COME IN DURING THE HEARING AND MODIFY THEIR APPLICATION ORALLY IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
BUT, BUT WE REALLY CAN'T GIVE AN APPROVAL FOR MULTIPLE APPLICATION OR MULTIPLE USES.
WE PROBABLY SHOULD AND IT'S PROBABLY APPROPRIATE JUST TO DO WHAT THE APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED UNLESS IT'S CHANGED DURING, DURING ALL THIS.
IF THERE IS A NEED FOR AN AMENDMENT OR A MODIFICATION IN THE FUTURE, THAT WILL NEED TO BE PRESENTED WITH THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION SO THAT YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.
THAT'S PROBABLY THE RIGHT, THE RIGHT ANSWER.
THAT, SIR? SO TO HEAR ALL THAT? YEAH.
SO WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TONIGHT IS, IS THE, IS THE SHINGLE THE ASPHALT SHINGLES, UNLESS YOU WANT TO AMEND THAT AS YOU STAND THERE TO A STANDING SEAM METAL, DO YOU WANT TO STAY WITH THE ASPHALT? AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE IT LATER, YOU JUST HAVE TO TALK TO, TO MATT.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING DO.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. HOLDEN? MATT, DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT, UM, ANY OTHER THINGS THAT YOU SAW ON THIS ON, UM, APPLICATION? I KNOW YOU'RE NOT DOING A FULL REPORT.
ALRIGHT, SO, UM, THERE WAS THE ISSUE ABOUT THE SITE PLAN.
SO THE, UM, YOU MIGHT SEE IN SOME DOCUMENTATION THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED THAT AS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS.
I WOULD NOW THEN REMOVE THAT ONE AND THAT WOULD ONLY LEAVE THE REMAINING TWO CONDITIONS
[00:40:01]
THAT ARE THE USUAL, THE STANDARD ONES.SO MATT, HAS THE NEW DRAWING BEEN APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR? UH, WOULDN'T SAY APPROVED, BUT, UM, IT, IT SEEMS TO COMPLY, BUT IF YOU WANT TO, UH, MAKE THAT, ACTUALLY ADD THAT MOTION IN THERE TO ENSURE THAT IT IS INDEED APPROVED, I THINK, I THINK THAT WOULD BE PRUDENT.
IT SHOULD BE NO BIG DEAL BECAUSE I'M NOT, THE ZONING, JUST SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS OKAY.
IS EVEN THOUGH WE THINK THAT SETBACK UNTIL ZONING REALLY APPROVES THAT THIS WOULD BE CONDITIONING ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU GET THAT APPROVAL BASED ON THAT
SO, UM, BASED ON ON THAT, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU HAVE BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT IT? NO.
ANY DIS ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS MATTER? NO.
NOW OBVIOUSLY IT'S A NEW STRUCTURE, CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS.
UM, OH, I GUESS WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T FIND OUT WHAT THE MATERIAL WAS FOR THE WINDOWS.
IT'S VINYL, IT'S HARDY BOARD SMOOTH AND ASPHALT SHINGLES.
SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M READY FOR THE MOTION IF YOU ARE.
I I AM CERTAINLY READY FOR THE MOTION.
I MOVE THAT WE FIND THE APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR, UH, 4 0 6 A AVENUE, 4 0 6 AVENUE A TO BE NOT IN CONGRESS WITH NEW BURNS CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTION 15 4 11 TO 15,429 IN NEWBERG HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND FINDINGS OF FACT, I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THE LIST OF APPLICABLE STANDARDS AS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR FINDINGS OF FACT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THE FINDINGS OF FACT AS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND I WOULD LIKE TO ATTACH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
I SUBMIT THE LIST OF CONDITIONS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ADD THAT CONSTRUCTION MAY NOT BEGIN UNTIL THE HPC AND ZONING HAVE A STON AND ZONING STAFF HAVE APPROVED THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU'VE SUBMITTED.
ANYBODY HAVE SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED.
AND SECOND, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? JUST TO BE CLEAR, MR. CHAIR, DID THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION INCLUDE THE FIRST CONDITION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT SHOULD BE REMOVED? THAT'S, UM, I I BELIEVE HE INCLUDED ALL THREE, BUT I, I COULD BE, WELL, IT INCLUDES ALL THREE, BUT I OKAY.
THE, THE, THE ONE ABOUT THE ZONING IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
YEAH, THAT'S, BUT IT'S THE TWO STANDARD CONDITIONS AND THEN THIS ONE ABOUT, UM, APPROVAL BY THE ZONING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? A OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
CAN I GET A, A MOTION TO ISSUE A COA SECOND HAS BEEN MOVED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? A, A, A OPPOSED? ALL SET.
[5.B. 226 E. Front St. – to amend the approved CoA for an infill project to include adding parking garages under first floor and modifications for floodplain requirements.]
NOW FOR, UM, THE NEXT HEARING.MATT, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THIS ONE? SURE.
AND, UH, WE COULD PROBABLY SWEAR IN ON WE WILL, WE WILL.
SO, UH, THIS IS, THIS PROJECT IS TO AMEND THE APPROVED COA FOR AN INFILL PROJECT TO INCLUDE ADDING PARKING GARAGES UNDER THE FIRST FLOOR AND MODIFICATIONS FOR FLOODPLAIN REQUIREMENTS.
SO THE OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION OF REPRESENTATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED.
UH, CHRIS WALKER, THE WALKER GROUP ARCHITECTURE INCORPORATED HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE OWNER AND THE CHIEF BUILDING OF INSPECTOR AND ZONING AND ADMINISTRATOR HAVE, UH, REVIEWED THE REQUESTED AMENDMENT AND COMMENTED ACCORDINGLY.
UM, SO THE APPLICANT AGAIN IS CHRIS WALKER, THE WALKER GROUP ARCHITECTURE.
THE PROPERTY OWNER IS MR. JAMES ARY JUNIOR, AND THE PROJECT IS AT 2 23 EAST FRONT STREET.
IT'S A VACANT LOT AND THERE OBVIOUSLY THEN ARE NO, UH, DESCRIPTIONS OF THE VACANT LOT IN OUR OTHER REFERENCES.
AND THIS IS IN THE DENSE FABRIC, UH, DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
THE AERIAL HERE, IT SHOWS THAT VACANT LOT.
IT'S NOW BEING USED FOR PARKING AND STREET.
THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS P*****K STREET.
IT'S A 2018 IMAGE OF THE SITE FROM STREET VIEW.
AND THEN THE APPLICANT'S PROVIDED THESE IMAGES AS WELL.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, UH, THAT'S BEEN CROPPED AND EXPANDED TO JUST INCLUDE THE SUBJECT AREA.
UH, AND THE AMENDMENTS, UH, FOR THE SITE ARE A REVISED PARKING AREA.
UH, REMOVE THE ACCESS RAMP, WHICH CAME DOWN THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BUILDING, AND, UH, ALSO THE FRONT AND THEN, UH, THE EXTENDED EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS.
[00:45:01]
ALL THREE, UH, ON THE FRONT AND THE BACK.UH, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE ONE ON THE FRONT IS AT THE TOP OF THE IMAGE THERE, WHICH SPLITS IN TWO DIRECTIONS.
AND THEN THE BOTTOM TWO LEFT AND RIGHT CORNERS SHOW THE STAIRWAYS THERE.
THEY ALL HAD TO BE EXTENDED FOR, UH, EXTRA ELEVATION OF THE FLOOR.
SO, UH, WE ALSO SHOW THE GROUND LEVEL PLAN, WHICH IS, UM, WOULD, COULD BE CONSIDERED SAY THE BASEMENT.
AND IT SHOWS THE SEVEN PARKING GARAGES THERE.
UH, THERE'S A NEW ELEVATOR LOBBY, UH, AND THE ELEVATOR NOW EXTENDS DOWN TO THAT LEVEL AND THERE'S A NEW ELEVATOR LOBBY FOR THAT.
AND THE SHOWS THE EXTENDED, UH, STAIRWAYS, PARTICULARLY THE ONES IN THE LEFT, LOWER LEFT AND LOWER RIGHT THEN FOR THE FIRST FLOOR, UM, BEEN SOME CHANGES TOO.
UH, THE REAR ARCADE, WHICH WAS IN THE, UH, APPROVAL HAS BEEN NOW ELIMINATED AND THE SPACE HAS BEEN EXTENDED OUT TO THE, UH, REAR WALL OF THE BUILDING.
UM, WE'LL SEE THAT IN ELEVATION IN A SECOND.
THE ACCESS RAMP IS NOW GONE AND IT'S NOW AN EXTERIOR FLAT WALKWAY ON THAT, UH, SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
THEN, UH, THE EXTENDED STAIRWAYS ARE ALSO SHOWN HERE AGAIN.
SO FOR THE FRONT OF THE WEST ELEVATION, WE HAVE, UH, YOU CAN SEE, UH, SOME CHANGES HERE.
UH, THE FOUNDATION IS ABOUT TWO FEET HIGHER.
UH, THE GROUND IS ABOUT TWO FEET LOWER IN THE DRAWING.
UH, THE INSET BREAKAWAY WALLS, UH, HAVE BEEN ADDED, UH, BEFORE IT WAS, UH, SOLID, SOLID FOUNDATION WALL.
AND THESE ARE BREAKAWAY WALLS FOR THE FLOODING REQUIREMENTS WITH THIN SET BRICK, UH, ON THEIR FACE.
UH, THE ACCESS RAMP IS NO LONGER, UH, COMING, EXTENDING ALONG THE FRONT RIGHT CORNER OF THE BUILDING.
THE EXTENDED STA EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS, THOSE ARE JUST A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN THEY WERE BEFORE, BUT AS A RESULT, THE DOWNSPOUTS ARE MOVED.
UH, ONE BAY OUTWARD FROM THE CENTER, UH, TOWARDS THE RESPECTIVE LEFT AND RIGHT, UH, UH, BREAK IN THE BAYS AND THE RAILING HEIGHTS WERE ADJUSTED BECAUSE, UH, SOMEONE CAUGHT THAT AT OUR DESIGNER REVIEW MEETING.
UH, AND THE REAR, UH, ELEVATION TO EAST ELEVATION, UH, FACES THE RIVER.
UH, THIS HAS THE SEVEN GARAGE DOORS.
UH, THE BUILDING IS TWO FEET HIGHER, THE GROUND ABOUT TWO FEET LOWER, AND THE REAR ARCADE IS BUILT OUT.
UH, WINDOWS HAVE BEEN ADDED WHERE THERE WERE JUST OPENINGS BEFORE.
UH, THE NEW ELEVATOR LOBBY ENTRY IS IN THE LOWER RIGHT CORNER OF THE ELEVATION THERE WITH, UH, KIND OF A STOREFRONT DOORS AND WINDOWS.
AND THE EXTENDED EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS LEFT AND RIGHT ARE ALSO SHOWN 'CAUSE THEY HAVE TO GO DOWN A LITTLE FARTHER.
AND THEN THE ONE ON THE RIGHT ACTUALLY HAS A SWITCHBACK.
UH, THEN THE P*****K STREET ELEVATION, THE ONE WITH THE TOWER ON IT.
UM, UH, SO EAST FRONT STREET IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE AND THE MAIN ENTRY IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ELEVATION.
UH, THE BUILDING IS TWO FEET HIGHER.
THE GROUND SHOWN IS IS SHOWN SLOPING TO THE REAR, ABOUT TWO FEET LOWER, UH, THAN THE PREVIOUS DRAWINGS.
AND THE EXTENDED EXTERIOR STAIRWAY WITH THE SWITCHBACK IS SHOWN THERE.
AND THE INSET BREAKAWAY WALLS WITH THIN, THIN SET BRICK ALSO SHOW UP ON THIS ELEVATION.
THEN ON THE OPPOSITE ELEVATION, THE SOUTH ELEVATION, THE ONE VERY CLOSE, UH, WHATEVER, 10 FEET, WHATEVER FROM THE, UH, ADJACENT BUILDING THAT THE RAMP THAT WAS ON THAT SIDE HAS BECOME A FLAT WALKWAY AND THE RAMP, UH, ELIMINATED AND IT EXTENDS FROM THAT FRONT ARCADE.
THERE IS STILL AN ARCADE ON THE FRONT, UH, TO THE REAR STAIRWAY, WHICH YOU SEE THERE.
UH, THE EXTENDED EXTERIOR STAIRWAY, IT'S NOW LONGER THAN IT WAS BEFORE.
AND INSET BRICK WAY WALLS WITH INSET BRICK AGAIN ALONG THAT ELEVATION AS WELL.
UH, AND THE GRADE, UH, IS SHOWN SLOPING TO THE REAR.
UH, ONE LAST, UH, DRAWING HERE IS TO SHOW, THIS IS THE, UH, DETAIL ABOUT THE FIN SET BREAK BREAKAWAY WALLS.
UH, YOU CAN SEE HOW THE BRICK IS MUCH THINNER, UH, IN ITS SECTION, BUT IT'S, UH, LOOKS, UH, I BELIEVE IT WILL LOOK LIKE THE, UH, SAME KIND OF, UM, UH, BRICK SIZE AND BOND PATTERN AS THE REST OF THE WALLS.
BUT, UH, MAYBE WE CAN ASK OUR, UH, APPLICANT IF THAT'S THE CASE.
AND YOU CAN, THIS IS THE SAME, ON THE SAME PAGE, SHOWS HOW THAT ACTUALLY IS AFFECTED IN ITS CONSTRUCTION.
NOT NECESSARILY AN ISSUE FOR US PER SE.
[00:50:01]
UM, LIKE THE FULL PACKET ENTERED INTO RECORD, UM, WHICH INCLUDES THE APPLICATION INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, THE COMPLETED ZONING AND INSPECTIONS FORM IN THE STAFF REPORT.UM, YEAH, TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD.
SO IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING, THAT'S AWESOME.
UM, I KNOW YOU WEREN'T HERE TO BE SWORN IN MR. WALKER, SO COULD YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND PLEASE? SURE.
UM, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITY? YES.
DID YOU SIGN IN AS WELL? I DID.
SO YOU'VE HEARD WHAT MATT SAID, THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THE APPLICATION OR ACTUALLY THE THE AMENDMENT, UM, APPLICATION.
YEAH, I THINK, I THINK MATT DID A GOOD, PRETTY GOOD JOB OF EXPLAINING IT.
I MEAN, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE HE PULLED MOST OF OUR, OUR DRAWINGS FROM OUR SET.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS SAW THE WHOLE EXTENDED SET OF DRAWINGS THAT WE, WE GAVE WITH ALL THE DETAILS.
SO I'M, I I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UM, ARE YOU, ARE YOU OKAY TO YEAH.
ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS? MM-HMM
NOW I THINK MATT BROUGHT UP ONE, WHICH IS THE, THAT THIN SET, UM, BARRIER IS, IS THAT BRICK THAT'S GONNA BE APPLIED TO THAT? IS THAT THE SAME BRICK BUT JUST CUT THINNER AS EVERYTHING ELSE? WILL THAT, WILL THOSE PANELS MATCH THE REST OF THE BRICK ON, ON THE BUILDING? THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PLANNING TO DO, IS TRY TO GET IT AS CLOSE AS WE CAN.
SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE THE SAME BRICK, BUT YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO, IT MAY NOT BE THE SAME BRICK, UM, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO MATCH IT UP AS CLOSE AS CAN.
AND WILL, WILL IT BE MORTARED, UM, YOU KNOW, ONCE IT'S ON THERE OR IS, IS THAT, IS IT LIKE A PANEL, THE BRICK PANEL WITH ALREADY? UM, THAT'S KIND OF COMES PRE, PRE MORTARED? UM, I THINK WE'LL TRY TO MORTAR IT ONCE WE GET IT ON.
I THINK WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE A BETTER APPLICATION IF WE DO THAT AND A BETTER MATCH.
I THINK IT'LL BE A, A BETTER, SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULDN'T BE A BETTER MATCH AS WELL.
UM, I NOTED ON, AND I DON'T HAVE MY, THE PLANS IN FRONT OF ME, BUT, UM, THERE WAS A DETAIL ON A A 4 24 AND I THINK THAT'S, THIS IS THE ONE THAT HAD, UM, A, A A A RAILING, LIKE A STAIR, A KIND OF A, A A LANDING FOR A STAIR MM-HMM
AND IT LOOKED LIKE, AT LEAST ON THAT DETAIL THAT IT SHOWED, UM, HORIZONTAL MEMBERS ON THE, ON THE RAILING.
BUT YOU'RE GOING ALL VERTICAL MEMBERS, CORRECT? YEAH, IT'S ALL PICKETS.
SO I, I WASN'T SURE WHAT THAT WAS TRYING TO SHOW.
I THOUGHT MAYBE IT WAS JUST A STANDARD DESIGN FROM SOMETHING ELSE, BUT IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE IT MATCHED THE REST OF THE OTHER, OTHER DETAILS.
I'LL HAVE TO CHECK THAT DETAIL.
BUT YEAH, IT'S, IT'S ALL PICKET RAILING, ALL VERTICAL.
UM, I, I, THE, THE, THE COINS, THOSE, THE BRICK COINS THAT ARE GONNA BE ON THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING, THOSE ARE JUST THE WAY IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE JUST KIND OF LAID OVER THE, THE, THE BRICKS.
THESE ARE NOT REPLACING THE BRICKS.
THE BRICK WALL COMES TO THE CORNER AND THESE COINS JUST ARE JUST, UH, CEMENTED ONTO THE EXISTING BRICK STRUCTURE? OR ARE THEY FULL DEPTH? THEY SHOULD, NO, THEY'LL BE FULL DEPTH MORE THAN JUST A, A SURFACE APPLIED.
THAT, THAT DETAIL CONFUSED ME.
IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS A BRICK WALL AND THAT THOSE, THOSE COINS WERE ONLY GOING TO BE PUSHED ON, UM, AFTERWARDS.
NO, THAT IT'S JUST COINED OUT.
WHAT'S THAT? IT'S BILING, THE BRICKING INCH.
SO THAT WOULD JUST BE PULLED OUT A LITTLE BIT.
STILL, STILL WORKING THROUGH ALL THE DETAILS NOW.
UM, AND THEN I, I NOTICED A STRUCTURE ON THE ROOF OF THE, THE ONE WITH THE RAILING ON, ON THERE.
I'M, I'M ASSUMING THAT IS JUST, UM, ORNAMENTAL.
THAT'S JUST TO HIDE SOME OF THE MECHANICAL TR PENETRATIONS ON THE ROOF.
AND, AND I NOTICED THAT THERE'S WOOD ON, ON THOSE STRUCTURES AS WELL.
IS IS THAT COULD BE OKAY TO MAINTAIN INSTEAD OF JUST BEING, UM, METAL THERE, THERE IS SOME, UM, WOOD ON THOSE STRUCTURES AS WELL ON THE RAILING ON THE ROOF TO BE, THE RAILING ON THE ROOF SHOULD JUST BE METAL.
UM, WOULD YOU PULL UP, UM, IT, IT IS KEY, IT IS KEYED, UH, AS BEING METAL RAILING WITH STAIN WOOD GUARDRAILS, JUST THE RECORD.
SO YOU MIGHT WANT IT'S ON, IT'S ON A 1 0 4.
THAT THAT'S, AND I'M ALSO LOOKING AT A 3 0 3.
YEAH, IT'S ALL METAL RAILING ON THE ROOF.
WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN UP THERE.
AND YOU TALKED ABOUT ROOF PENETRATIONS, BUT IS, ARE THERE GONNA BE UM, AC EQUIPMENT ON THE ROOF AS WELL? IT IS, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE HIDDEN INSIDE OF THE, THE STAIR TOWER IN THOSE SILOS, IF YOU WILL.
THAT'S SO THEY WON'T BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
THEY'LL ALL BE WITHIN THOSE, THE MM-HMM
[00:55:03]
ALRIGHT.UM, COMMISSIONERS, ANY, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE, UH, APPLICATION? I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION.
UM, LOOKING AT MATT, CAN YOU MAYBE PULL UP A 1 0 1? IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S, THERE'S A ENCROACHMENT OF THE FRONT YARD INTO THE, OR OVER THE FRONT YARD INTO THE SIGN OFF.
IS THAT CORRECT? HAS THAT BEEN THROUGH ZONING? SO I WANNA MAKE SURE, MAYBE IT'S MAYBE THE LINE'S IN THE WRONG PLACE.
I THOUGHT MAYBE IT'S JUST A, YOU SAY A 1 0 1? YEAH.
UM, ENCROACHMENT OF THE, UH, THE STAIRS THERE IN THE FRONT? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.
WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE MATCHING UP WITH THE, THE ADJACENT BUILDING, THE STAIR LINE FROM THAT BUILDING, JUST MATCHING IT WITH THAT.
HAS THAT BEEN ALONG SIDEWALK? HAS THAT BEEN APPROVED? IT WENT THROUGH SITE PLANNING REVIEW.
I'M PRETTY SURE THAT THAT WAS ON THAT, BUT WE CAN, WE CAN VERIFY THAT.
AND AGAIN, I'M, I'M NOT TRYING TO HARASS YOU, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE
WELL THERE WAS A NOTE FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, A MINOR DEVIATION APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED.
DIDN'T SAY WHAT IT WAS, BUT THAT'S FOR THE, UH, SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
IT WAS JUST THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS AMENDMENT TO COA? NOT QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK IT WAS GOOD TO SEE THE REVISED GROUND LEVELS.
NOW YOU'RE MORE ACCURATE ON THE GROUND LEVELS AND I REALLY THINK THE ACCESS TO THE BUILDINGS IMPROVED THE WAY YOU'VE CHANGED THAT AS OPPOSED TO THE RAMPS AND THE ELEVATOR AS OPPOSED TO THOSE RAMPS, THE ONE AROUND THE BUILDING.
YEAH, I THINK THAT WAS A NICE TOUCH TOO.
I THINK IT REALLY HELPED OUT FOR AN ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE HEIGHT.
WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT THAT THIS BUILDING CAN BE, CAN BE OR CAN BE OR IS WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THAT? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TOWER OR THE MAIN STRUCTURE? WELL, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WHOLE THING.
BOTH THE TOWER HAVE THAT NUMBER UP.
HEIGHT, UM, RESTRICTION FROM COMMERCIAL.
UM, UH, WE DID KIND OF LOOK AT IT BRIEFLY AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S FINE.
UH, THERE'S EXCEPTIONS FOR TOWERS AND FIRES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HBC BUILDING HEIGHT OR, UH, CITY, OUR BUILDING CODE.
I REALLY THREW YOU OFF WITH THAT REQUEST, DIDN'T I?
SO, UM, YOU SAY YOU'VE, YOU'VE SORT OF CHECKED IT OUT, BUT IS IS IT WORTHWHILE, UM, EITHER ADDING THAT AS A CONDITION, VERIFYING THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER MEETS THE, THE CITY STANDARDS BEFORE WE GO FORWARD? I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO DELAY THE PROJECT JUST TO DETERMINE IF IT MEETS, BUT WE COULD DO IT.
RICHARD, WHAT DO YOU THINK? WELL, I THINK SOMEBODY NEEDS TO LOOK AT IT.
I SEE THAT THE ROOF TRUS BEARING IS AT 47 FEET AND THE TOWER ROOF BEARING IS AT 65 FEET, SEVEN INCHES.
THERE'S ANOTHER 10 OR 12 FEET OF TOWER ABOVE THAT.
SO, BUT YOU SAID YOU HAD WE CAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY CHECK THAT AND IF, IF ANYTHING WE CAN PULL IT DOWN SAYING AS NEEDED.
I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT YOU DID HAVE YOUR PROJECT REVIEW, YOU SAID? WHAT'S THAT? YOU'VE HAD YOUR PROJECT REVIEW WITH THE CITY? NOT YET, NO.
WE WERE WAITING FOR THE SUPPORT BOARD TO MOVE INTO CITY.
IT'S, AND, AND MR. PARSONS, TO YOUR POINT, THE CITY DOES NOT INCLUDE CHIMNEYS, ANTENNAS AND OTHER ROOFTOP APARTMENTS IN THEIR HEIGHT CALCULATION, BUT BECAUSE THIS MAY BE IN AN OVERLAY, I, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE SAYING DEFINITIVELY WHAT THE BUILDING HEIGHT MAXIMUM IS FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION.
I'M ASSUMING THEY WOULD REVIEW THAT MATCH DURING THE REVIEW OF THE, THERE WE GO OF THE BUILDING PERMIT.
UM, WOULD THEY LOOK AT HEIGHT OF STRUCTURE DURING THE CLIMATE PROCESS? WELL, THEY, THEY WOULD BUT UM, THIS IS NOW WHAT, TWO FEET TALLER? MM-HMM
WELL, THEY HAVEN'T HAD THE PROJECT REVIEW.
IF IT PASSED BEFORE IT'S AT THE WORST CASE SCENARIO TWO FEET.
IT HASN'T, IT HASN'T BEEN THROUGH CITY REVIEW YET.
I GUESS THAT'LL SHAKE OUT THEN IN THAT.
[01:00:07]
OKAY.UM, MR. WALKER, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR, OR, OR COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE STEPS TO GO HERE BECAUSE, UM, WHEN WE KEEP WITH OUR NEW FORMAT HERE, WE KEEP ASKING THE APPLICANT QUESTIONS BEFORE WE NORMALLY WOULD.
AND THAT SKIPS OVER THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC.
AND, AND THE REST BEFORE YOU THEN WOULD GENERALLY DELIBERATE.
UM, AND ALSO THE QUOTE UNQUOTE STAFF REPORT IS DISTILLED DOWN TO POTENTIAL ISSUES NOW.
SO, UH, WHAT WE HAVE FOR POTENTIAL ISSUES, UH, ONE IS DOES THE INCREASE IN FLOOR HEIGHT FROM WHAT WAS APPROVED, IT'S PLUS TWO FOOT TWO INCHES, MAKE THE PROPOSAL INCONGRUOUS WITH 2.1 0.3 FOOTPRINT SCALE.
A PROPORTION OF INFILL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN KEEPING WITH NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES IN GENERAL IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO CONSTRUCT A THREE STORY STRUCTURE AREA THAT IS DOMINATED BY ONE STORY STRUCTURES JUST, UH, BECAUSE IT'S DIFFERENT.
IT'S A QUESTION THAT I HAVE TO ASK.
SO, SO WE BACK, GO BACK TO THAT.
UH, UM, YOU SAY IT'S DOMINATED BY ONE STORY STRUCTURES.
THE, THE BUILDING NEXT TO IT IS THREE STORIES.
THE ONE ACROSS THE STREET IS MULTIPLE STORIES.
SO I'M NOT SURE THAT THE AREA IS DOMINATED BY ONE STORY STRUCTURES.
SO, UH, BUT IT IS AN INCREASE IN HEIGHT AND SO, BUT I SEE, SO YOU WERE JUST TALKING, YOU WERE JUST QUOTING THIS? YES.
YOU WEREN'T SUGGESTING THAT'S IN THERE.
IT PROVIDES YOU WITH, OF COURSE, SOME AMMUNITION IF YOU NEED IT.
UM, THE SECOND POTENTIAL AND THIRD POTENTIAL ISSUES, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO REVIEW THE LANDSCAPING PROPOSAL TO MAKE SURE THE PROPOSAL WILL BE CONGRUOUS WITH 4.13? MINIMIZE THE VISUAL IMPACT OF TALL FOUNDATION WALLS BY INTRODUCING COMBINATION OF LANDSCAPING GRADING AND TERRACE RETAINING WALLS, UM, ET CETERA.
BUT THE, UH, WE DID SEE IN THE PACKET THAT THE, UM, THE RENDERINGS INCLUDED, UH, SOME LANDSCAPING ALL AROUND IT.
BUT THE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS FOR THAT.
UH, AND THEN THE THIRD ITEM IS, UH, FLOOD VENTS AND ACCESS DOORS, UH, NEED TO BE ADDED, UH, TO THE ELEVATIONS AS WELL.
SO IN, IN, IN OUR FLOODPLAIN STANDARDS, THEY NEED NOT ONLY BREAKAWAY PANELS, BUT FLOOD VENTS AS WELL.
THAT'S REQUIREMENT TO DO BOTH.
BUT NOW, TYPICALLY, 'CAUSE NOT ALL FLOODS KNOCK OUT THE WALLS, TYPICALLY, WE CAN SEE THE LANDSCAPING PLAN LATER SUBMITTED TO YOU.
WE'VE DONE THAT TYPICALLY IN THE PAST.
THAT IT IS A CONDITION OR, UM, WELL, MOSTLY DATA AS A CONDITION BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A LARGE, UH, FOUNDATION WALL THAT YOU'RE APPROVING TODAY.
ARE, ARE YOU PLANNING ON HAVING LANDSCAPING IN, IN, ON THAT STRUCTURE? ON, UM, ON THE, ON THE LARGE WALL? THAT'S KIND OF ON YOUR FIRST STORY NOW? YES.
WE CAN PUT TOGETHER A LANDSCAPING PLAN.
I THINK THE SAME FOR EVENTUALLY THE LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THE, UH, WINDOW, THE FLOOD, THE DOORS, AND THE GARAGE DOORS.
JUST A CUT SHEET OF THE DESIGN.
'CAUSE YOU HAVE THE, THE LEGEND, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY DESCRIBE WHAT THE DOORS LOOK LIKE.
BUT THAT CAN ALSO BE SOMETHING LATER ON.
AND I'LL POINT OUT IN, UH, WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH I BELIEVE THIS IS RIGHT, MR. SHOW? YES.
UM, IT'S NOT A WATERFRONT, UH, ABUTTING YEAH.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT TIGHT WEAVE? NO.
IT'S, UH, THE DENSE, DENSE FABRIC.
DENSE FABRIC BECAUSE IT'S SO CLOSE TO ALL THE PROPERTY LINES, LIKE, LIKE THE DOWNTOWN IS.
I DO HAVE THE, UH, RENDERING HERE FOR THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
OH, MAYBE I DIDN'T PUT IT IN THE PRESENTATION.
SO HOW DOES THAT WORK IF, IF THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT, UM, THAT CHRIS IS GOING TO SUBMIT LATER, LIKE THE DOORS, LIKE THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, UM, IS, IS THAT CONDITIONED IN THIS APPROVAL? DO WE NEED TO, TO, TO NOTE THAT AS PART OF THE MOTION, TYPICALLY.
SAME WITH LIGHTING, JUST SOMETHING THAT AS YOU FLESH IT OUT, THE LIGHTING PLAN LIGHTING, YEAH.
[01:05:02]
SO I'M, I'M ANXIOUS TO SEE THIS 'CAUSE IT'S QUITE, QUITE A, ESPECIALLY FROM THE APPLE, APPLETON, NEW SMITH HOUSE ORIGINALLY.IT'S QUITE A, YEAH, IT'S COOL.
QUITE A, SO MATT, DO YOU, DID YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR, UM, FROM, FROM STAFF? MM.
I'M JUST TRYING TO BRING UP THAT, THE RENDERING WITH THE LANDSCAPING, BUT I GUESS WE'LL JUST SKIP THAT.
IS IS THAT RENDERING OF, OF THE LANDSCAPING AND THAT'S NOT THE PLAN, THAT'S JUST KIND OF A, AN ARCHITECTURAL YEAH, THAT'S JUST A YEAH.
YOU HAVE SOME PUSHES HERE AND THERE.
AND MR. CHAIR, JUST FOR THE BOARD'S KNOWLEDGE OR, OR REFRESHING YOUR RECOLLECTIONS, THERE IS A ZONING AND INSPECTIONS REVIEW DOCUMENT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN STAFF'S, UM, PACKAGE THAT HAS A COMMENT FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR INDICATING HE DID NOT HAVE ANY COMMENTS AS IT RELATES TO THE SUBMISSION.
AND WOULD, WOULD THAT BE LOOKING AT THE HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE DURING AN EVENT? WHAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR IS LOOKING AT IS WHETHER THIS PROJECT COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE, WHICH INCLUDES SETBACKS, HEIGHT, AND VARIOUS OTHER CRITERIA.
SO WE STILL WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE, UM, UH, ACTUALLY IF YOU LOOK FURTHER IN THAT HE HAS LISTED THE MINIMUM HEIGHT OF THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE IS 66 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL.
I THINK THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
I I'M MISSING A SLIDE, WHICH WOULD BE THE PUBLIC COMMENT SLIDE.
SO I WAS GONNA SAY, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WHO HAS RECEIVED NOTICE, WHO WOULD CARE TO SPEAK, OR ANYBODY WHO IS PERHAPS HAS NOT RECEIVED A NOTICE, BUT BELIEVES THEY HAVE EVIDENCE THAT WOULD BE RELEVANT AND WHO HAS, UM, CAN SHOW STANDING IN THIS, IN THIS MATTER.
UM, WOULD YOU GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE? SURE.
OWNER OF 2 2 9 EAST FRONT STREET.
CAN, CAN I SWEAR YOU IN? CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HAND PLEASE? SURE.
UM, I'M ASSUMING YOU ARE SOMEONE WHO HAS RECEIVED NOTICE BEING? I HAVE.
UM, DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITY? I WILL.
THE, THE DIFFERENCE I SEE IN THIS STRUCTURE, AND I WELCOME THE BUILDING BEING BUILT.
I THINK YOU DID A BEAUTIFUL JOB.
UM, MY QUESTION IS, THE FOUNDATION IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT NOW.
IS THERE, ARE THERE ANY RULES FOR FOUN HEIGHTS OF FOUNDATIONS? I JUST, I DON'T KNOW.
IT LOOKS DIFFERENTLY TO ME NOW.
UM, SO MY QUESTION IS, IS WHY, WHY? SURE.
WHAT ARE THE RULES? I KNOW THAT, UM, OTHER PEOPLE HAVE WANTED TO DO PARKING UNDERNEATH BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN AND HAVE BEEN DENIED IT IN THE PAST.
SO FOR THE SAKE OF CONSIST CONSISTENCY, AND I JUST DON'T KNOW THE RULES FOR IT.
UM, I PREFER THE FIRST DRAWING WITHOUT THE GARAGE UNDERNEATH IT.
I THINK IT LOOKS BETTER OVERALL, BUT THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION.
UM, CHRIS, DO YOU WANNA COME UP AND, AND ADDRESS THE REASON FOR THIS AMENDMENT TO THE REASON FOR ADDING THE, THE GARAGES? YEAH.
SO, SO WE HAD TO PULL UP THE BUILDING BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO TALK IN THE MICROPHONE.
WE HAD TO PULL UP THE BUILDING BECAUSE OF THE FLOOD ELEVATION AND THE, AND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOODING IN THAT ZONE.
SO THE, THE HEIGHT THAT WE HAD IT BEFORE WAS A, A FEW FEET BELOW WHERE IT HAD TO TO BE.
UM, SO WE HAD TO RAISE THE BUILDING TWO TO THREE FEET TO, TO GET IT TO THAT FLOODPLAIN LEVEL, TO THE BELOW THE STRUCTURE, THE LOWEST HORIZONTAL, HORIZONTAL MEMBER OF THE STRUCTURE.
I'M, I'M SORRY, YOU CAN'T TALK THERE.
YOU HAVE TO COME UP AND TALK TO THE MICROPHONE.
UM, YEAH, IT'S 10 FEET TO THE, THE BOTTOM OF OUR STRUCTURE.
THEN WE HAVE TWO FEET OF STRUCTURE, FLOOR STRUCTURE, FLOOR TRUSSES, AND UM, AND THEN THAT PUTS IN A SET AT THE FIRST FLOOR LEVEL, WHICH IT GAVE US ENOUGH ROOM TO GET PARKING FROM THE BACKSIDE.
'CAUSE THE, THE SITE KIND OF SLOPES FROM THE BACK.
SO THAT'S WHY WE PUSHED THE PARKING TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING THERE AND TRIED TO UTILIZE THE SPACE THAT WE, WE HAD UNDER THE BUILDING AT THAT POINT.
AS, AS I UNDERSTAND CHRIS, IS, IS, I THINK AS YOU EXPLAINED AT
[01:10:01]
A, AT THE, THE DESIGN REVIEW MEETING, YOU WERE FINE WITH THE, WITH THE, WITH THE PREVIOUS ONE, BUT WHEN YOU HAD TO RAISE THE STRUCTURE A COUPLE OF FEET, YOU THOUGHT THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD WAY TO UTILIZE THAT, THAT KIND OF, THAT GROUND FLOOR, THAT THE BASEMENT FLOOR BY PUTTING IN GARAGES.WE WERE, WE WERE PERFECTLY FINE.
YOU CAN'T USE IT FOR, FOR INHABITED SPACE.
NO, IT CAN'T BE INHABIT SPACE.
UM, SO, SO YEAH, WE HAD TO PULL IT UP AND WE, WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A CHOICE.
IT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE PULLED UP WHETHER WE HAVE GARAGES UNDER THERE OR NOT.
SO, AND, AND I THINK TO ANSWER YOUR OTHER QUESTION ABOUT, UM, THERE, THERE TO PUT SOME KIND OF A, A LIT LANDSCAPING OR SOME KIND OF MITIGATION, UM, SOMETIMES YOU CAN PUT STEPS OF, OF LAND TO, TO KIND OF MINIMIZE THAT.
IT'S NOT REALLY THE CASE HERE, BUT WE'LL BE CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT THAT LANDSCAPING PLAN IS TO SEE IF YOU CAN, UH, MINIMIZE THE EFFECT OF HAVING THAT LARGE WALL THE WHOLE WAY AROUND THE STRUCTURE.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AS BEST WE COULD? I I CAN ADD SOMETHING ABOUT THE UNDERNEATH GARAGES.
WHAT WE'VE INTERPRETED IS IN THE TIGHT WEAVE PATTERN ONLY, WHICH IS THE HISTORIC HOMES AREAS.
UH, WE DON'T ALLOW ATTACHED GARAGES.
AND THE INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN THAT'S AN ATTACHED GARAGE, BUT IT DOES, IT DOESN'T APPLY IN OTHER DISTRICTS.
RESIDENTIAL USES NOT RESIDENTIAL.
YEAH, IT'S IN, IT SAYS IN THE TIGHT WEAVE PATTERN.
AND A LITTLE BIT, A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THIS, YOU KNOW, THE DESIGN STANDARDS, WE NOW, THEY CAN'T POSSIBLY ADDRESS EVERY ISSUE NEEDED TO, TO FLOODING.
UH, SO EACH APPLICATION IS ITS OWN, ITS OWN UNIQUE SITUATION.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE BY THE RIVER, AND IT WAS THE SAME KIND OF SITUATION, IS THAT THEY HAD TO HAVE IT ELEVATED SO HIGH AND THEIR REQUEST WAS TO PUT PARKING UNDER THERE TO UTILIZE THAT SPACE, BUT IT COULD NOT BE OCCUPIED SPACE.
THE, UM, THE TOWNHOUSES AT THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE, SAME SITUATION.
UH, THEY HAD TO BE ELEVATED SO HIGH AND THAT LITERAL GROUND SPACE, UH, THERE WAS NO USE FOR THAT OTHER THAN POSSIBLY PARKING.
SO IF, IF, CAN I, JUST SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE NOT MISREPRESENTED, UM, YOUR PREVIOUS APPLICATION THAT WAS APPROVED, UH, INDICATED, UH, THE LIMBU LEVEL FOR THE FIRST FLOOR, UH, SURFACE AREA FOR THE ELEVATION OF THE FIRST FLOOR, CORRECT? OR DID THAT INCLUDE THE TWO FOOT FREEBOARD ALREADY? THE PREVIOUS A APPLICATION? YES.
THE ONE THAT'S BEEN THE, THE APPROVED COA IT, IT DID NOT INCLUDE THE, UH, THE TWO FOOT FREE BOARD.
YEAH, WE MISSED THAT IN THE, SO THEN THAT MEANS THAT, UM, MY REPRESENTATION HAS BEEN INCORRECT IN THAT IT'S NOW FOUR FEET TALLER THAN IT USED TO BE OR THAN IN THE PREVIOUS, UH, PROPOSAL.
WELL, IT'S NOT EXACTLY FOUR FEET NOW.
WE LOOKED AT IT, IT, I THINK IT'S THREE FEET TOTAL HEIGHT ADJUSTMENT.
SO IT'S FOUR FOOT TWO HIGHER BECAUSE, UM, APPARENTLY IT WAS 10 FOOT BEFORE, AND NOW IT'S 14 FOOT TWO.
YOU CAN AGREE TO DISAGREE IF YOU WANT, BUT IS THAT FROM GROUND LEVEL OR FROM THAT 14.2 OR THE 10 FOOT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? SO ARE WE TALKING SO FROM C LEVEL OR ARE WE TALKING FROM GROUND? ON THE PREVIOUS DRAWINGS, IT SHOWED THAT THE FIRST FLOOR WAS AT THE LIMBU, WHICH HE JUST SAID WOULD BE WITHOUT THE FREEBOARD.
BUT WE REQUIRE, UH, TWO FEET ON TOP OF THAT.
THIS WHOLE CITY DOES FOR, UM, THE ENTIRE FLOODPLAIN AREA.
SO, UH, HE SHOULD HAVE, UH, DESIGNED IT FOR 12 FEET LAST TIME.
UM, BUT WE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT HIS NUMBERS WERE AT THE TIME.
SO, UM, COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS APPROVED DRAWINGS, WHICH SHOWED A 10 F ESSENTIALLY A 10 FOOT FLOOR HEIGHT ABOVE SEA LEVEL, UM, IT IS NOW SHOWN TO BE 14 FOOT TWO ABOVE SEA LEVEL.
YOU WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, CHRIS? I, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE DRAWING AGAIN THAT I, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE.
BUT IT HAS TO BE THAT ANYWAY, JUST BECAUSE IT, WITH THIS
[01:15:01]
PROPOSAL, IT HAS TO BE THAT 'CAUSE, UM, UH, AS HE DID SAY THE, UM, THE 12 FEET HAS TO BE MET BY THE UNDERSIDE OF THE LOWEST HORIZONTAL STRUCTURAL MEMBER, UH, WHICH THEY DO HAVE IN THESE PLANTS.SO IT IS THE LOWEST IT COULD POSSIBLY BE FOR THIS.
AND, AND SO THAT 12 FEET, I THOUGHT BASE FLOOD ELEVATION THERE WAS 10 AND YOU NEED TWO FEET ABOVE THAT.
AND THEN YOU THEN, THEN THE FOURTH, SO, AND APPARENTLY HE, THE PREVIOUS DRAWING WAS JUST DRAWN TO THE, THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION, NOT THE ADDITIONAL, SO THE, SO THE, THE COMMENT BY THE, UM, UM, THE, THE, THE RESIDENT IS THAT THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL HIGHER BRICK WALL ON THE FIRST IS NOT, IS IS IS SOMEWHAT TRUE MM-HMM
BUT REGARDLESS OF ALL THAT, I MEAN, WE WERE WRONG ON THE FIRST PROPOSAL.
WE'RE AT THE EXACT MINIMUM NOW.
SO, AND THERE'S NO WAY TO BUILD IT ANY LOWER THAN THAT.
THERE'S NO WAY TO BUILD IT ANY LOWER, I MEAN RIGHT.
THAT'S A REQUIREMENT OF, OF THE FLOOD FLOOD DEVELOPMENT, FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT.
IS, IS THAT WALL, UM, IS IT SMOOTH BRICK OR IS THERE INDENTATIONS OF THE BRICK OR PATTERNS TO THE BRICK TO BREAK UP THE SOLIDNESS OF THE WALL? ANY KIND OF DETAIL YOU'RE ADDING TO IT? THE BRICK ITSELF? YEAH.
THEY, THAT WALL, LIKE THE BREAKAWAY PANELS, ARE THEY, ARE THEY RECESSED OR ARE THEY FLUSHED? I THINK THAT'S OH, THEY ARE, THEY ARE RECESSED BACK FROM THE, UH, THE PILLARS.
UM, SO THERE'LL BE AN IATION THERE, KIND OF AN OFFSET FROM THE WALL.
SHOW THAT THAT'S, THAT'S, AND THAT SHOWS THAT SHE'LL, THAT SHE'LL IN FRANKLIN AND LANDSCAPING CAN DEAL WITH SHADOW THE HEIGHT.
UH, OTHER, OTHER, UH, COMMENTS? COMMISSION, ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? I'M LOOKING, I'M LOOKING AT THE RENDERING ON PAGE GIVES US GIO ONE WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE SPARROW HOUSE AND THEN THIS STRUCTURE, UH, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT GETTING BOGGED DOWN IN HEIGHTS AND ALL THAT, WHAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON IS MASS SCALE PROPORTION, DIMENSION DETAILING.
I THINK THIS IS THE BEST, THE BEST ILLUSTRATION.
ASSUMING IT'S DRAWN ACCURATELY OF WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE DIMENSIONS OF THIS ARE.
IT'S, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HAD TO RAISE IT.
UH, WE HAVE NO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NO SAY OVER THAT.
IT'S GOT TO MEET, YOU KNOW, THE FLOOD REQUIREMENTS.
BUT I THINK, UH, ASSUMING THIS RENDERING ON GI OH ONE IS ACCURATE, THEN, UH, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GONNA GET.
AND CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY IN PROPORTION, YOU'RE NOT CONCERNED WITH THE ADDITIONAL THREE OR FOUR FEET, WHATEVER IT TURNS OUT TO BE IN, IN, UH, I MEAN, THE ROUGH REFERENCE TO THE NEIGHBORING BUILDING, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH, WITH THAT? UM, MASSING IT, I THINK IT MEETS THE STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE, UH, RIGHT NOW.
UH, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER OPTIONS THERE ARE.
I THINK, I THINK THIS, I, I THINK WHEN WE APPROVED FOR THE FIRST TIME, UH, WE THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE, THEN I THINK IT STILL MEETS THAT WITH A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM FOR THE, UH, FLOOD ISSUES.
THAT SAME DRAW PICTURE ON GI OH OH ONE ALSO SHOWS SOME LANDSCAPING, WHICH ALSO BRINGS DOWN THE YEP.
THE HEIGHT OF THE WALL AND IT'S, THE BUILDING WAS THERE ORIGINALLY WAS QUITE SUBSTANTIAL TOO.
AND WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THAT LANDSCAPING PLAN.
SO, UM, ANOTHER APPROACH THAT WE RECOMMEND IN THE, UH, IN THE GUIDELINES IS TO, UH, USE SOME, UM, UM, TERRACING OF THE LAND ABOUT AROUND THE, UH, AROUND THESE HIGH WALLS AS WELL AS, UM, SOMETIMES JUST SLOPING THE GROUND UP TO IT.
AND I, I THINK JUST BECAUSE OF THE CLOSE PROXIMITY OF THE, OF THE RIGHT OF WAY, I THINK TERRACING MIGHT NOT BE A AVAILABLE OPTION.
WELL, WE DO HAVE QUITE A FEW HOMES THAT ACTUALLY HAVE WALLS ALONG THE SIDEWALK WITH THEN TWO OR THREE FEET OF SOIL BEHIND THAT.
SO, BUT I THINK EVEN THE STAIRWAYS AS, AS, UM, COMMISSIONERS MM-HMM
THE STAIRWAYS WOULD BE A, YEAH.
STAIRWAY IS ALREADY IN THE, APPEARS TO BE IN THE, UH, IN THE RIGHT
[01:20:01]
OF WAY.SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'D BE AMENABLE TO PUTTING A, A WALL THERE AS WELL, BUT I THINK, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING FOR THE LANDSCAPING PLAN.
YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT THAT AND HOW, HOW TO BEST MINIMIZE TO KEEP THAT COVERED, THAT FACE, THAT TALL FACE.
WE CAN HELP SCALE IT DOWN WITH SOME LANDSCAPING THERE, THE FRONT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? ALRIGHT.
UM, I WOULD, UH, LOOK TO HAVE, UM, A MOTION THEN PLEASE.
THINKING ABOUT THE THINGS THAT, UH, THAT, UH, MR. SHELLEY TALKED ABOUT TOO, AS, AS PART OF HIS CONCERNS, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE, WE FIND THE APPLICA A, EXCUSE ME, THE AMENDMENT FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 2 26 E EAST FRONT TO BE NOT IN CONGRESS WITH NEW BERN'S CODE OF ORDINANCE SECTION 15,411 TO 15 429, AND BERT'S, HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND FINDINGS OF FACT, WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THE LIST OF APPLICABLE STANDARDS AS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS OF FACT.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THE FINDINGS OF FACT AS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ATTACH THE FOLLOWING CONDI CONDITIONS.
I SUBMIT THE LIST OF CONDITIONS DOCUMENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ADD DETAILS OF DOOR DESIGNS, A LIGHTING PLAN, AND THE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR PRIOR TO THEIR INSTALLATION.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
COULD I GET A MOTION? DO I HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION TO ISSUE AN AMENDMENT TO THE COA? NO.
WELL THEN I DON'T, I I DON'T WANNA ENTERTAIN THAT
WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE PROJECT.
YEAH, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.
[6.A. Information on Historic District Design Principles and Standards Update]
THE WAY.LET'S MOVE ON TO, UM, OLD BUSINESS.
UM, WE HAVE, UM, HISTORIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARD UPDATE.
AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, WE HAD THAT MEETING LAST WEEK, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, AND DO WE GET A FINAL COUNT? HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE HERE? ABOUT 50, 60? I THINK THE ESTIMATE WAS 50.
UM, SO I, I KNOW YOU TOOK ALL, TOOK COPIOUS NOTES AND HAVE YOUR OWN THOUGHTS ON THIS MATTER, BUT WE THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE, UM, EASIER TO WORK FROM A SINGLE DOCUMENT.
SO, UM, COMMISSIONER MORRISON PUT TOGETHER A, A LIFT AND WE HANDED THAT OUT, WHICH KIND OF SUMMARIZES THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE AT, AT THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING.
I TOOK MY NOTES AND THEN ALSO WENT BACK TO THE VIDEO.
YEAH, NO, I, I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT IT WAS WELL DONE.
UM, AND IN ADDITION THEN TO, UH, TO MOVE THIS ALONG A LITTLE BIT, WE'VE GOT TWO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS THAT WE DISTRIBUTED.
UM, ONE IS, UM, ALL OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE GOT AT THE MEETING, AS WELL AS THOSE ONLINE TO DATE, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE OTHER ONES THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP SINCE THE, UM, SINCE THE DRAFT WAS PUBLISHED.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE FIRST COLUMN THERE, A SOURCE.
THE SECOND ONE IS THE TOPIC, THE THIRD IS THE CONCERN, AND THE FOURTH IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD TALK ABOUT.
SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS EVERYBODY TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OF THESE, GO THROUGH THEM, AND AT OUR NEXT DESIGN REVIEW MEETING, THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST, I WANT TO RUN DOWN ALL THESE, UH, OR AS MANY AS WE CAN AND TRY TO GET A CONSENSUS ON WHICH THINGS ARE OR HOW WE WANT TO CHANGE THEM.
AND THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DRAFT BASED ON THE CONSENSUS.
THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER SHEET THAT I, THAT THOUGHT MIGHT BE USEFUL.
IT'S A, IT'S A ONE PAGE SHEET AND IT HAS ALL OF THE SUGGESTIONS AND COMMENTS REGARDING NON, UH, STANDARDS, UM, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP.
AND WHILE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO JUMP ON THOSE RIGHT AWAY, THOSE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT.
BUT LET'S KIND OF WORK ON THE, ON THE STANDARDS FIRST AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO THE NON STANDARDS THEN.
NOW, IN ADDITION TO THIS LIST, IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE HEARD OR THINGS THAT YOU KNOW ABOUT, THINGS THAT, UM, YOU THINK THAT THEY SHOULD BE CHANGED, UM, THIS MAY BE ONE OF OUR LAST OPPORTUNITIES TO, TO MAKE SOME CHANGES.
UM, I'D LIKE YOU TO EITHER SUBMIT IN WRITING TO, TO THE GROUP OR BRING 'EM TO THE NEXT MEETING SO WE CAN ADD THEM TO THE LIST AS WE TALK ABOUT.
ANY QUESTIONS, THOUGHTS ON THAT MATTER? I KNOW IT'S A LONG LIST, SO, SO, UM, SOME OF THEM WILL GO FAST, SOME OF THEM MAY NOT GO FAST, BUT THERE'S QUITE A FEW ON HERE.
I'D LIKE TO GET THROUGH AS MANY AS WE CAN AT THE NEXT DESIGN REVIEW MEETING.
[01:25:03]
OKAY.JIM, DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING ON THAT? I KNOW YOU DIDN'T.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, AND I SEE IT ON HERE TOO, I, I HAD IT IN MY NOTES, UM, IS ABOUT FUNDING BEING DIFFICULT TO ACCESS.
WHERE DO WE EVEN STAND WITH THAT? THAT IS NOTHING TO UNDER OUR PURVIEW.
SO IS THAT EVEN SOMETHING WORTH, UM, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSING OR ADDING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? BECAUSE WE HAVE NO SAY SO IN THAT, RIGHT? RIGHT.
[7.A. Additions and Revisions to the Minor Works list]
OKAY.UM, LET'S MOVE ON TO, UH, NEW BUSINESS.
WE HAVE, UM, SOME, UH, PROPOSED ADDITIONS AND REVISIONS TO THE MINOR WORKS LIST.
UM, MATT, DO YOU WANT TO, UH, TAKE A, A STAB GOING THROUGH THAT? YES.
THREE OF THEM ARE ON THE SCREEN, TWO ARE ON THE NEXT SCREEN.
FIRST ONE IS, UH, AND AS YOU KNOW, THE, UH, MINOR WORKS LIST OR REMINDER AT LEAST, UH, IS DIVIDED INTO, UH, THREE SECTIONS, STARTING WITH A PRIMARY AREA OF VISUAL CONCERN.
SO ANY THINGS WHICH ARE, UH, IN THAT, ANY WORK THAT WOULD BE IN THAT AREA.
AND THEN LISTED IN THAT SECTION WOULD BE, UM, MINOR WORK.
THEN THE SECOND SECTION IS, UH, THE SECONDARY, OH, I THINK IT'S MAYBE JUST TWO SECTIONS NOW, SECONDARY AND TERTIARY.
UM, AND IT USUALLY STARTS OFF BY INCLUDING, OR IT DOES START OFF BY INCLUDING, UH, EVERYTHING IN THE PRIMARY, IN THE SECONDARY AND TERTIARY AS WELL.
PLUS THEN A WHOLE SERIES OF THINGS THAT, UH, ARE MINORS ONLY IF THEY'RE IN THE SECONDARY OR TERTIARY.
SO, UM, THESE, UH, SUGGESTED CHANGES SHOW WHICH PORTION OF THE LIST WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO ON THE PRIMARY SECTION, UH, THE, WE WOULD, WE ARE ASKING TO ADD FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, CHANGING CONGRUOUS MATERIALS WITH OTHER CONGRUOUS MATERIALS.
SO JUST AS THE FIRST APPLICATION THIS EVENING, FOR EXAMPLE, WAS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THEY HAD EXISTING CONGRUOUS MATERIALS, IT WAS WOOD, THE, I BELIEVE THE EXISTING WINDOWS WERE WOOD, AND THEY WANTED TO CHANGE OUT WITH SOME OTHER MATERIAL THAT WAS ALSO CONGRUOUS BECAUSE IT WAS BUILT OR A MATERIAL THAT EXISTED AT THE TIME THAT THE, UH, BUILDING WAS BUILT.
UM, AND IS NOT ONE OF THE FORBIDDEN, UH, MATERIALS.
SO, UH, THAT IF WE HAD HAD THIS PASSED WITH THE LAST MEETING, THEY WOULD'VE GOTTEN THEIR MINOR INSTEAD OF HAVING TO COME AND DO THAT WHOLE THING TODAY.
UH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS 'EM AS WE GO ALONG OR GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM.
UM, JUST GO THROUGH, I THINK WE, LET'S, LET'S GO THROUGH 'EM ALL AND, AND THEN, OKAY.
AND THEN WE'LL, WE'LL GO BACK AND, AND TALK ABOUT SOME OF THEM QUESTION.
SO THE NEXT ONE IS ALSO IN THE PRIMARY TO CHANGE, UM, WHAT WE SIMPLY SH SCR SAY AS, OR DESCRIBE AS STORM WINDOWS AND STORM DOORS TO ADD, UM, TO ADDING OR REPLACING STORM WINDOWS, STORM DOORS AND SHUTTERS OR BLINDS.
UH, SO, UM, WHEREAS BEFORE IT WASN'T CLEAR IF IT INCLUDED REMOVING OR REVISING STORM WINDOWS AND STORM DOORS.
NOW WE'RE JUST LIMITING IT TO ADDING THEM.
UM, AND THEN ALSO THEN ADDING SHUTTERS OR BLINDS AND NOT REVISING OR REMOVING THEM.
THE THIRD ONE IS TO ADD FLOOD AND FOUNDATION VENTS.
UM, JUST LIKE, UH, SAY THIS APPLICATION WE JUST TALKED ABOUT WHERE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THEM ON THE DRAWINGS, SOMETIMES THAT SHOWS UP AFTER THE FACT AND WE, UH, UM, UH, HAVE TO BRING THEM BACK TO THE MEETING JUST TO DO THAT AT THIS POINT.
SO, OR IF SOMEBODY IS ACTUALLY RETROFITTING THEIR, UH, FOUNDATION, UH, TO JUST ADD THE FOUNDATION VENTS AND FLOOD VENTS, AND ESPECIALLY IN THE FLOOD DISTRICT, UM, WE HAVE SOME PRETTY CLEAR, UH, STANDARDS FOR THOSE ITEMS, UH, IN THE, IN THE STANDARDS ALREADY.
THE FOURTH ONE IS AGAIN, STILL IN THE PRIMARY.
SO ALL FOUR SIDES OF THE BUILDING, UM, TO, UM, THE ONE THAT WE ALREADY HAVE THERE CALLED AMENDMENTS TO MINOR OR MAJOR COAS THAT EXCHANGE CONGRUOUS MATERIALS WITH CONGRUOUS MATERIALS ADD OR THAT CHANGE THE HEIGHT OR WIDTH OF APPROVED WINDOWS WITHOUT VIOLATING VERTICAL OR SQUARE ORIENTATION.
[01:30:02]
SO WE CAN MAKE THAT A SEPARATE ONE IF YOU'D PREFER.UM, BUT IT'S STILL WITH REGARD TO AMENDMENTS TO MINOR OR MAJOR COAS, THAT IMPLIES THAT THIS, UH, BODY HAS ALREADY, FOR THE MAJOR ONES, HAS ALREADY SEEN THE, THE PROJECTS.
AND FOR MINOR ONE, FOR A MINOR, COA, UM, THESE WOULD BE ADDING THAT TO BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE HEIGHT OR WIDTH OF APPROVED WINDOWS WITHOUT VIOLATING VERTICAL OR SQUARE ORIENTATION.
AND THE THING IS ABOUT AMENDMENTS IS THE AMENDMENTS ONLY OCCUR WHILE THE PROJECT IS STILL UNDERWAY.
SO WE HAVE CONTRACTORS THAT ARE OUT THERE THAT ARE HAVING TO DEAL WITH WHATEVER PECULIARITIES HAVE ARISEN, UM, OR EVEN PERHAPS THE, UM, UH, THE DOOR WINDOW ISN'T AVAILABLE ANYMORE OR THERE'S A DIFFERENT SIZE THAT THEY WANT OR SOMETHING.
SO, UM, THESE THINGS COME UP DURING THE PROJECT AND IT USUALLY IS SOMEWHAT URGENT BECAUSE IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION, WE HAVE CONTRACTORS BEING PAID, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
SO, UM, MAKING THESE THINGS, UM, MINOR, UH, HELPS THE APPLICANTS AS WELL AS, UM, NOT ADDING SOMETHING AS MINOR AS THAT TO YOUR, UM, TO YOUR DOCKET.
AND THE FIFTH ONE IS FOR THE SECONDARY AND TERTIARY AREAS TO ADD CRAWLSPACE ACCESS DOORS.
THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE FOUNDATION VENTS AND, UH, FLOOD VENTS.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE STANDARDS FOR THE CRAWL SPACE DOORS THAT ARE SIMILAR.
UM, AND WE ACTUALLY DID HAVE ONE OF THOSE, UM, UH, SIMILAR, UH, APPLICATIONS A FEW YEARS AGO.
UM, THEY ACTUALLY ENDED UP HAVING A WHOLE, UM, ACCESS PIT AND EVERYTHING, SO IT DID BECOME A MAJOR ANYWAY, BUT FOR, UM, MOST CASES WHERE IT'S JUST ADDING A DOOR OR, UM, TO, UM, UH, THE SIDE OR THE REAR OF A, OF A STRUCTURE, UM, THAT SEEMS TO BE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS ALSO STRAIGHTFORWARD, HAS SOME VERY CLEAR STANDARDS FOR.
UH, COMMENTS PEOPLE? I HAVE A COUPLE.
I HAVE, WELL, THE ONE I'M, THE ONLY ONE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS, UH, THE ONE THAT SAYS ADDING OR REPLACING STORM WINDOWS AND STORM GORDS AND SHUTTERS OR BLINDS.
IT CONFLICTS WITH THE DRAFT, UH, DEPART, UH, DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS, UH, COMPONENTS CHART, WHICH SAYS YOU CAN REPLACE, UH, EXCUSE ME, ADD SHUTTERS TO A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE ONLY WHERE THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT THERE HAD BEEN SHUTTERS THERE BEFORE.
AND I KNOW COMMISSIONER PARSONS SAID MANY, MANY COMMENTS ABOUT WHEN SHUTTERS MAY OR MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE AT ALL, AND BASED ON THE AGE AND THE STYLE OF THINGS.
AND SO I THINK WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE PRIMARY A VC INAPPROPRIATE CHANGES IN PRIMARY A VC SEVERELY ALTER THE CHARACTER OF A BUILDING OR SITE AND COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF THE STREET SCAPE, THUS GREAT CARE IS TAKEN TO ASSURE APPROPRIATE CHANGES.
SO I, I WOULD SUGGEST WE DON'T HAVE ADDING SHUTTERS OR BLINDS.
REPLACING IS FINE, BUT, UH, I HOPE GOOD CARD WITH THAT, BUT MAYBE MOVE DOWN TO SECONDARY ADDING SHUTTERS AND THE SECONDARY IS FINE.
I'M NOT SURE I WANT TO GO WITH THAT, BUT I THINK, WELL, I MEAN, YOU PROBABLY ARE GONNA REPLACE MATCH WHAT'S IN THE FRONT MOST LIKELY.
BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE IS TO MOVE IT DOWN THERE.
BUT I THINK TO SAY SHUTTERS AND BLINDS, UM, I DON'T THINK SHUTTERS AND BLINDS OUGHT TO BE A MATTER OF WORK.
HOW ABOUT, HOW ABOUT REPLACEMENT THOUGH? UM, IF, IF, IF SOMEONE HAS AND THEY JUST NEED TO TAKE 'EM DOWN AND AND REPLACE THEM, THAT'S, THAT'S FINE.
BUT, BUT IF BLINDS BE CONSIDERED INTERIOR THOUGH, THE BLINDS OR THE LOUVERED ONES, THE LOUVERED SHUTTERS ARE CALLED BLINDS.
AND 'CAUSE ONE THING I'M SAYING, I MEAN, JUST RETURNING FROM EUROPE, I, I SAW SO MANY INTERIOR SHUTTERS, YOU SEE IT AT LIKE TRYON, UM, WITH THAT, AND THOSE ARE INTERIOR WHERE THEY WERE MOSTLY NOT TO PROTECT FROM STORM, BUT MORE FOR HEAT.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO I, I'M KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE AN EXCEPTION WITH THAT.
I UNDERSTAND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EXTERIOR, BUT IF YOU COULD SEE THE INTERIOR SHUTTERS FROM THE OUTSIDE, THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.
THAT'S JUST, SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.
OKAY, SO WAS EVERYBODY ELSE THINK ABOUT THE IDEA OF REMOVING ADDITION OF SHUTTERS FROM THE MINOR LIFT.
SO A REPLACEMENT IS ACCEPTABLE FROM A MINOR, BUT NOT, DOES THAT, DOES THAT SEEM LIKE IT'S IT'S GOOD.
THE OTHER, THE OTHER THING THAT I HAD ALONG THE SAME LINES IS WE GO DOWN TO FOUR,
[01:35:02]
SO WE APPROVE A-A-A-C-O-A ON THE PRIMARY, AND THEN SOMEONE COMES IN AND WANTS TO CHANGE THE HEIGHT AND WIDTH OF A WINDOW THAT WE APPROVED AS, AS PART OF THAT.WOULDN'T THAT, COULDN'T THAT HAVE, UM, A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE LOOK OF, OF, OF THAT STRUCTURE? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH AS A MINOR? I'M COMFORTABLE THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR WOULD BRING IT TO US IF HE THOUGHT IT WAS IMBALANCED.
I, I I I, I THINK THIS ADMINISTRATOR WOULD, YEAH, I, I, I, AS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HAS POINTED OUT ON MULTIPLE TIMES IS WE'RE NOT JUST SETTING THE STAGE FOR NOW.
IT'S ALSO SETTING THE STAGE FOR A FUTURE.
AND, AND I JUST, I'M NOT SURE I'M COMFORTABLE SAYING THAT SOMEONE COULD GET SOMETHING APPROVED AND THEN GO IN THE NEXT DAY AND SAY, HEY, BY THE WAY, I'M GONNA CHANGE THE WIDTH OF ALL OF THESE WINDOWS.
AND THE HEIGHT, I, I'M SORRY, DIDN'T IT SAY AS LONG AS IT WAS, UH, REPLACING THE SAME SIZE? NO, IT CHANGES THE HEIGHT FOR WIDTH ON NUMBER FOUR.
SO MATT, COULD YOU GIVE US AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE YOU'VE, WHERE YOU'VE RUN INTO THIS, WHAT, WHAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF THE ISSUE YOU'RE TRYING TO RESOLVE HERE WITH CHANGING THE HIKE? WE HAVEN'T EVER HAD ANYTHING LIKE THAT BEFORE, HAVE WE? UM, BATHROOM AND KITCHENS.
UH, ONCE OR TWICE DOWN AT, UM, AT RIVER RIVER STATION.
UM, THOSE WERE OF COURSE, UH, NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCK, YOU KNOW, NEW INFILL BUILDINGS.
UM, AND, UM, I BELIEVE THEY, THEY WERE LIKE, UH, MOVING SOME STAIR INTERIOR STAIRWAYS OR SOMETHING.
AND NOW SUDDENLY THE WINDOW WAS DIFFERENT OR THE BATHROOM GOT BIGGER OR SMALLER.
I THINK THERE WAS, THAT HAPPENED LIKE TWICE.
UM, I FORESEE ONE POTENTIALLY COMING FORWARD IN, UH, THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS, UH, WHERE IT'S AN APPROVED COA, UH, IT, THEY'VE STARTED THEIR PROJECT, UH, YEARS AGO.
SO IT'S, UH, STILL A VALID COA, UM, BUT I FORESEE THEM WANTING TO CHANGE THEIR, UH, WINDOWS, UM, CONSIDERABLY.
I'VE SEEN THE, UH, THE CONTRACTOR'S DRAWINGS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM THE, UM, FROM THE, WELL, SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT.
WELL, SHOULD THAT COME TO A THAT YES.
SO, UM, UM, IS THIS THE ONE THAT STARTED AS MOVING COUNTERS OR WALLS INSIDE AND NOW HAS EVOLVED IN THESE? NO, NO, NO.
SO, BUT, UM, THOSE USUALLY COME AS THE INITIAL APPLICATION, NOT AS AN AMENDMENT TO AN APPROVED, APPROVED, UH, ONE.
UM, SO I GUESS THIS ONE I'M THINKING ABOUT IS TO, UM, SEE IF WE CAN MOVE THE PERSON TO NOT MAKE THEM SUCH SIGNIFICANT CHANGES, BUT TO MAKE THEM RELATIVELY MINOR CHANGES THAT ARE ACTUALLY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE, TO THE APPROVED PLAN.
BUT, UH, UM, SO IF, IF WE CAN MAKE THAT A MINOR THAT WOULD HELP THAT PROJECT DO THAT, UM, OTHERWISE I THINK, UH, WE MAY END UP WITH SOMETHING WORSE THAN WE, UH, CAN GET OUTTA IT.
BUT, UM, THAT'S, I GUESS TRYING TO, TO, TO WORK IT OUT FOR THAT PARTICULAR ONE, UM, THAT I CAN FORESEE.
BUT I'M ALSO SEEING THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THAT, UH, BECOMES AN ISSUE FOR OTHER PROJECTS JUST AS THEY'RE MOVING ALONG.
UM, WHETHER IT BE THE CIGAR BAR BUILDING, YOU KNOW, IF THEY NEEDED TO MOVE THINGS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, UH, MOVE, UH, WINDOW HEIGHTS AND WIDTHS A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN THEY, UH, CURRENTLY, UH, HAD APPROVED OR THE, THE DUPLEX ACROSS THE STREET.
I MEAN, ALL THESE PROJECTS HAVE THESE THINGS HAPPEN, UM, AS CHANGE ORDERS, RIGHT.
JOHN, UM, IN THE, THE MIDDLE OF A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FOR ALL KINDS OF REASONS ALLOW CHANGE ORDERS.
SO YES, ALSO FROM MY EXPERIENCE AS AN ARCHITECT, THAT HAPPENED QUITE A BIT.
SO YOU'RE THINKING, YOU'RE, YOU'RE THINKING IN TERMS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT SAYS YES, YES, YES.
'CAUSE I CAN'T, I CAN'T THINK OF A SITUATION WHERE, YEAH, THE COMMISSION HAS APPROVED YEP.
WE COULD A WINDOW ON A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, UH, YOU KNOW, IN THE, IN THE PRIMARY AREA.
COULD WE ADD NON-CONTRIBUTING TO THAT OR, OR, OR NEW MAKE SENSE TO MM-HMM
HAVE NEW, NEW OR NON CONTRIBUTING.
ACTUALLY, NON-CONTRIBUTING ISS PROBABLY BETTER THAT IT GIVES, IT GIVES, I THINK NON, I WAS THINKING NON-CONTRIBUTING.
[01:40:01]
GIVE SURE THE ADMINISTRATOR A LITTLE MORE AUTHORITY WITHOUT DAMAGING OUR EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STOCK OR POTENTIAL TO MM-HMMGIVES US MORE AUTHORITY TO AUTHORITY OVER.
SO THAT, THAT IS WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF, SAY THE FIRST APPLICATION TODAY, AGAIN, WITH THE WINDOWS, THEY WERE GONNA DO SOME REPLACEMENTS, RIGHT? UH, THERE IN THAT, IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, THEY ARE JUST REPLACING THE SASHES IN, IN, IN THE EXISTING OPENINGS.
THEY'RE NOT REALLY CHANGING ANY SIZES.
UM, BUT IF THERE WAS A SITUATION WHERE THERE WAS AN APPLICATION WHERE WE APPROVED IT, IT'S NOW GOING TO BE AN AMENDMENT, AND NOW THEY, BUT IT'S NOT A NEW BUILDING, RIGHT? THAT WASN'T A NEW BUILDING.
PEOPLE ARE REPLACING WINDOWS, UM, AND SOME, SOMETHING LIKE A COUNTERTOP OR A BATHROOM WALL IS INVOLVED IN THE REHAB OF THAT BUILDING.
UM, NOW SUDDENLY THEY NEED TO CHANGE THE SIZE OF THE, THE HEIGHT OR WIDTH OF, OF A WINDOW.
UM, AND IF IT'S, IF IT'S ONE OR TWO WINDOWS YEP.
AND YEAH, WE, WE CERTAINLY WANT BE A, WE CERTAINLY WANNA BE FLEXIBLE, AND IF YOU WANT, YOU COULD MOVE IT CHANGING ALL THE WINDOWS.
THEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT, IF YOU WANT, YOU SHOULD MOVE IT TO THE SECONDARY AND TERTIARY INSTEAD OF PRIMARY AND KEEP IT AWAY FROM ANYTHING THAT YOU'VE SEEN FOR THE FRONT.
I LIKE, UH, EITHER OF THOSE, EITHER MAKING IT NON CONTRIBUTORY OR MAKING IT SECOND SECONDARY TERTIARY, UM, COMMISSIONERS SECOND SECONDARY TERTIARY.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD, A GOOD SUGGESTION.
AND, AND MY LAST ONE IS PRETTY MINOR THOUGH, MATT.
IS, IS, AND I'M NOT SURE IT'S NECESSARY, BUT A CRAWLSPACE DOOR, IS THERE LIKE A LIMIT TO WHAT A DOOR CRAWLSPACE DOOR SIZE COULD BE? I MEAN, I, FROM A PRACTICAL STAND ONLY GO TO THE FIRST FLOOR.
BUT LIKE IF YOU HAD, IF YOU HAD THIS, THE ONE THAT JUST GOT FINISHED ON FRONT STREET, RIGHT THERE, THERE, THERE DOOR, THEIR CRAWL SPACE, YOU COULD HAVE A FULL SIZE DOOR AND ON, ON ANY ONE OF THOSE PANELS.
AND UNDER THIS, THAT'S TECHNICALLY A CRAWL SPACE DOOR.
THAT COMES UP VERY OFTEN, BUT I JUST WAS THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, MOST CRAWL SPACES ARE DOOR CROSS CRAWL SPACES, CRAWL.
BUT WE'VE HAD SEVERAL BUILD SEVERAL HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN ELEVATED TO THE NEW FLOOD HEIGHT AND THE CRAWL SPACE IS NOW FOUR OR FIVE FEET TALL.
SO THE DOOR IS NOW, I DON'T KNOW, AGAIN IF THAT MATTERS, EVEN IF IT WAS FIVE FEET TALL, EVEN IF IT'S A REGULAR DOOR, IF IT'S IN THE SECONDARY TERTIARY, DO DO, DO THE COMMISSIONERS WANT TO SEE? UM, NO, TAKE A LOOK.
SO I, I'M, I'M THINKING THAT THE SIZE OF THE DOOR PROBABLY DOESN'T MATTER.
UM, AND, AND WE'LL LEAVE IT IN THE ADMINISTRATORS CAPABLE HANDS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT DOOR SHOULD LOOK LIKE AND, AND MAKE IT, MAKE IT, UH, APPROPRIATE FOR THE STRUCTURE.
TIM, LIKE ONE OF YOUR BASEMENT, YOUR BASEMENT DOORS OUT, THEY'RE LIKE FIVE FEET TALL OR SOMETHING.
YEAH, I WOULDN'T CALL THOSE CRAWL SPACE.
THAT WOULD BE THE WORST CASE SCENARIO THOUGH, RIGHT? YEAH.
ALRIGHT, SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS REALLY TWO THINGS, MATT.
I'M HEARING THAT, UM, ON THE SECOND ONE THAT YOU HAVE LISTED YEP.
THAT IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE SAYING ADDING OR REPLACING STORM WINDOW, STORM DOORS OR REPLACING SHUTTERS OR BLINDS.
AND THEN IN NUMBER FOUR, WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THE, THE, AND IT, AND IT PROBABLY COULD BE A, A SEC, A SEPARATE ONE.
UM, IT'S PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN CHANGING CONGRUOUS TO CONGRUOUS.
SO MAYBE A, A DIFFERENT, A DIFFERENT BULLET.
BUT SAYS, CHANGING THE HEIGHT OR WIDTH OF APPROVED WINDOWS WITHOUT VIOLATING VERTICAL OR SQUARE ORIENTATION, BUT MAKE THAT AS A SECONDARY OR TERTIARY NOT A PRIMARY.
IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE COMMISSIONER? YES.
SO, UM, BASED ON THOSE FIVE, CAN I GET A MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDING THE MINOR LIST TO INCLUDE THESE FIVE, UM, BULLETS AS, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THERE.
UM, WE REVISED, SO WE GOT ONE SECOND AND WE GOT A MOTION TO SECOND MM-HMM
UH, ANY MORE DISCUSSION? NO, ALL, NO, JU JUST, OKAY, GOOD.
I HAVEN'T REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT TILL TODAY, BUT THE, THE NEXT TO THE LAST ONE UNDER SECONDARY TERTIARY IS DEMOLITION OF NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
[01:45:01]
AND YET WE STILL FORCE OURSELVES THROUGH THE DETERMINATION OF IS IT CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING.AND THEN WE STILL FORCE OURSELVES THROUGH THE DELIBERATION.
UM, SOMETHING WE NEED TO, YEAH, I THINK THE, I THINK THE NEW STANDARDS TRY TO ADDRESS THAT.
TRY AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING.
SO, UM, WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION.
THE LIST IS GETTING PRETTY LONG THERE, MR. SHE THAT'S GOOD.
RIGHT? THEN WE JUST HAVE ALL OF OUR PUBLIC MAKE SOME COMMENTS.
GENERAL PUBLIC IS NOT HERE TO MAKE COMMENTS.
[9. HPC ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT]
SO LET'S GO TO THE, UM, ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT.SO THE MAIN THINGS HERE, UM, WE HAVE LISTED ON THE SCREEN AND AFTER OUR SIX MINERS FROM LAST MONTH, UH, SIX MORE ARE READY TO BE ISSUED SOON WITH 27 WAITING FOR INFO FROM APPLICANTS, THAT PILE GETS BIGGER AND BIGGER.
UM, THEN, UH, WE AT THE, UH, DEMOLITION OF NEGLECT, DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, UH, CASES THAT HAVE BEEN RESOLVED, WE'VE, UH, RECENTLY THIS PAST MONTH, UH, FIVE HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THE LIST OF CONCERN, WHICH IS THAT TABLE THAT WE USE TO, UM, UH, KEEP TRACK OF ALL THE CASES.
UH, THEY WERE REMOVED DUE TO REVIEW OF THE LIST AND, UH, REALIZING THAT SOME OF THEM, THESE FIVE HAD UNREQUESTED IMPROVEMENTS THAT, UM, WHAT ARE UNREQUESTED THINGS THAT JUST DID ON THEIR OWN.
UM, AND THEN, UH, HPC MEMBER TERMS, UM, TWO HAVE HA ENDED THEIR FIRST TERM.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER PARSONS HAS BEEN REAPPOINTED AND, UH, I SPOKE WITH COMMISSIONER RUSH EARLIER AND HE'S GOING TO BE RECONTACTING HIS ALDERMAN TO SEE, UM, WHAT'S THE HOLD UP, I GUESS.
UH, AND THAT'S IT FOR OUR, OKAY.
ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. SHELLEY? ALL RIGHT.
ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER COMMENTS? UH, IF, IF NO ONE, UH, PEOPLE WHO MAY BE WATCHING THIS WHO DID NOT SEE THE WORK SESSION, UH, THE OTHER WEEK, THE, THE, THE, THE WORK SESSION OR THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING, THE, THE WORK SESSION.
UH, WHERE WADE ROGERS FROM STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE TALKED ABOUT PAINT.
UH, I DON'T, I DON'T REMEMBER WHO WAS HERE AND WHO WAS NOT, BUT IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THAT AND ANYONE SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE IF THAT, THERE WAS AN EXCELLENT PRESENTATION BY WADE ABOUT WHERE PAINT IS GOING.
SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH PAINTING, UH, THESE, UH, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, OLD WOOD WITH, YOU KNOW, MODERN CONTEMPORARY PAINTS VERSUS, UH, SOMETHING ELSE.
AND FOLLOWING, FOLLOWING, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, AND IT'S QUITE EASY TO GET TO THE VIDEO RECORDING OF THAT, UM, ON OUR CITY WEBSITE, UH, YOU CAN GO TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PORTION AND GO TO THE AGENDAS AND MINUTES SECTION WHERE WE HAVE A LINK TO VIDEOS FOR ALL OF OUR MEETINGS, INCLUDING THAT ONE.
AND THEN EVEN ONCE YOU'RE IN THERE, UM, THERE'S, UH, AND YOU CAN CLICK ON THE AGENDA ITEM THAT TAKES YOU RIGHT TO THAT AGENDA ITEM.
SO IT'S VERY EASY TO GET TO THAT.
THE ALTERNATIVE METHOD IS TO GO TO THE HOW CAN I OR HOW DO I SECTION OF THE WEBSITE AND THEN YOU LOOK UP THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
BUT IT'S VIDEOS, IT'S BOOKMARK VERY WELL.
BUT THE OTHER ONE IS A LITTLE EASIER.
SO, AND IT'S ONE HOUR AND EIGHT MINUTES INTO THE VIDEO
BUT YOU CAN JUST, THE OTHER THING IS, IS WHAT WE DID, UM, UM, AFTER THE MEETING SUGGEST THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO COME BACK AND HAVE A MEETING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AND PERHAPS SOME OF THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, UM, TO TRY TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE TOPICS THEN A LITTLE BIT MORE TOO.
AND, AND I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE 'EM UP ON THAT AND, AND PERHAPS THIS FALL, TRY TO SCHEDULE SOMETHING, MAYBE NOT THROUGH HPC, BUT CERTAINLY MAKE IT AVAILABLE, UM, TO HPC MEMBERS AND OTHERS.
ANYBODY ELSE? UM, COMMENTS? WELL THEN I, I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.