May 10, 2021 Historic Landmark Commission on 2021-05-10 3:00 PM

Okay, welcome everybody to the scheduled May meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission. The first thing I want to note is that we do have a quorum present. So we are officially open for business. First up is the Pledge of Allegiance, if everyone will join me. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, now the Texas Pledge of Allegiance, honor the Texas flag, I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. Alrighty, thank you everybody that could be here. Ron, do you want to, at this point, give us an update on Ms. Cottrum? Yes, we heard late last week that Janelle Cottrum is no longer going to be able to serve on the HLC due to reasons that she no longer is a citizen, or a citizen resident, that is, with the city of Den. So, unfortunately, we will not have Janelle be joining us. We do, however, will be filling that seat as quickly as possible due to that we need one of the HLC commissioners to be an architect, so that will be something we are going to be doing as soon as we can. Okay, thank you. First up on our agenda is approval of the March 15th of 2021 minutes. I think you guys have that in your packet that was emailed to you. And this is HLC 21-0027 to move forward, I need a motion to approve or some changes. So move approval. Do we have a second? We have a second from Mary, who is muted. Second. Okay, so we have a motion and a second, any discussion? Okay, all those in favor indicate by raising your hand or waving at the screen. So it looks unanimous. So the minutes from March 15th, 2021 are approved. They are now signed. Second up for consideration is COA 21-0003, hold a public meeting and consider an application for a certificate of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Dent Development Code to construct an awning and reconfigure the front facade windows at 219 Jago Street within the West Oak Historic District. This site is located on the west side of Jago Street, just north of West Oak Street. And I think I'll turn it over to Ron at this point to walk us through this one. Actually, Chair, this is one that I'm going to turn it to Cameron to make the presentation. Can everyone see my screen? No, not yet. Okay. Okay, wonderful. So the first item is 219 Jago Street regarding an entrance awning and window configuration. David Spada, who is the applicant, should be on the call. So if you have any questions at the end of this, you can refer some of the questions to him as well as myself. So just to give you some background of location, it's in the West Oak Area Historic District. The location itself is 219 Jago Street. It's on the west side of Jago Street, just north of West Oak Street. The applicant is David Spada, and the building was built circa 1925. Oh, full view, yes, sorry. Apologies. Hold on, everyone. Where is the, sorry, come on. This one, okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, apologies, everyone. So the request is to build a new awning over the front main entrance, highlighted in the red box there, as well as redo the window configuration to the south or left side of the entrance. These will both be visible along Jago Street. So as you can see here in these photos, the front facade in circa 2020 is on the right hand side, and then we have our front facade currently circa 2021. This is showing the front elevation from Jago Street. They are proposing, as you can see here, the existing or the proposed awning, which is over the door, it would be proposed wooden awning with brackets to match the existing wooden eave and brackets, and the top of the awning would have the awning shingles, would match the roof as well. And then in terms of the windows themselves, we would have the multi-light double hung windows to match those windows as you saw in 2020. And then in terms of the siding color, it would be this mountain road, as you see here, and then our trim and brick colors would be this natural choice. So just as a reminder to everyone, we should use the Secretary of Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties as a guideline for this consideration. And then looking at section 4.9.6(c) of the DDC, I specify below the architectural requirements in the West Oak Area Historic District regarding to architectural detail, awnings, additions, roof forms, as well as windows and doors, kind of just a breakdown of those roof forms. Once again, we're looking at the material and colors, we're looking at patterns, and we're looking at the slope and pitch. In terms of windows and doors, we're looking at those front facade openings, we're looking at the glass, the style that is presented, as well as the size, the frames, and the openings. Staff recommends approval of the COA request to install an awning over the main entrance and the reconfigure of the windows to the south of the main entrance. So if anyone has any questions. Can you show us the start again so that I kind of got confused on the very first picture you shared, which was the original and kind of went from downhill from there? Sure. No problem. Hold on a second. Are you looking specifically at this one? That one. Yeah. Okay. So what are the differences? I mean, what's the one on the two on the right? The two on the right are the front facade in 2020. The contractor didn't know that they required to get a COA. So they had started working on the project and I asked them to stop working until they got that COA. So these are the original windows here on the right hand side. And then these original left hand windows with the metal awnings above. And what the applicant is proposing is this new awning with the wooden brackets to match the current slope and pitch of this roof. As well as multi-light double hung windows to be placed on the left hand side. And the right, which they've taken out and put up different windows? Right. So the right hand side, they would be adding and making the multi-light windows. That's just by putting a little plastic in, right? Or am I just missing the idea? They've taken out the old windows and trashed them, right? Yes, they currently put the older windows, they took them out due to energy issues and then they proposed these multi-light double hung windows. Will they be individual panels or just a little piece of plastic, which is not the same? It'll be multi-light. So not multi-pane. No. That's kind of not really in character in the historic district or did I miss it. And in fact, you can make older windows quite work. It just is kind of expensive. I mean, it's changed already now, so we're just going to put little pieces of plastic and say, oh, it's regular, it doesn't matter. Okay. Any other- David, are you, sorry, Chair. Go ahead, Cameron. David, Spada, are you on the call by chance? Okay. I guess not. The applicant had wanted to be on the call regarding this application, but I guess he was unable to join. Cameron, can you also remind me about color choices? Color choices, they are not dedicated in the West Oak Area Historic District. They do not require a COA. They just need to be complimentary to the area as well as the historic pallets. So technically those are not under review in this COA process. Are they technically into the historic pallets? You said they were. That's why I'm asking. Yes. You ever heard of Mountain, whatever? Okay. So I have a question, Cameron. When this house was originally built, all of these individual windows were individual panes, right? In wooden frames? Okay. Okay. Are there any other questions for the staff? Just our options on here. Okay. So at this point, our options are to, and any of these would need a motion to either approve as submitted, approve subject to conditions, to deny or continue the item, I believe, to a specific date. Any of those would need a motion and a second, in which case we would move to discussion. I believe failing a motion, this thing is approved in, excuse me, Ron, would that be 180 days? I have a motion. Okay. Go ahead. I move that we deny the COA on the basis that the window frames do not match historic character and they do not replace what was there. Okay. We have a motion on the floor. Is there a second? I do second that. Yeah. It just, it doesn't look right. And it's front-facing. All right. Great. So we have a motion and a second, so I will throw the floor open for discussion. If we need to go back to staff to question this, but let's air this one out. Go ahead. Just take off. Well, Cameron, would you remind us again of what you said the requirements were? The requirements for the window? Yes. They are required to match the style and period of the home. So the home has previously been altered into a 1950s home in terms of those windows that currently exist. However, it was built in the 1920s. So I guess it is dependent upon which era people are choosing to base this approval or denial upon. Well, even a 50s home is 60 years old now, and that is antique. When the historical district was made, what kind of windows did it have then? The period of significance? Is that what you're asking, Lenny? When was the historical district established? It was established, I believe, in the early 2000s. Yes. And what kind of windows were in this house at that time? The ones that you see -- So we're asking him to go back and put in something that wasn't in there when it was taken into the historical district? Correct. Yes. No, no, no. We are not asking him to take something back that wasn't there. We're just asking him to match what was there before he ripped it out. That doesn't seem to be what she's telling me. That's what I heard, that he's -- from the pictures you showed me, Cameron, he ripped out and put just plain glass front, the picture you showed me had divided single pane windows. Now, maybe I missed it. Correct. So this is currently what he has because he was asked to stop work. So the front facade currently in 2021, he was asked to stop work and not continue working on the facade due to the fact that he needed a COA. So the front right facade in the 2021, that shows the previous facade with the three windows that are multi-pane windows and then the left-hand side. So he has proposed putting in these multi-light double-hung windows to be more representative of what originally was there. But multi-light windows are not individual planes, they're little plastic dividers that can easily be popped in and out, right? Correct. So they're not really representative of the time period? No, they're not representative of the time period, but they provide the same style of the same -- of the period. Okay. Any further discussion? I mean, Evan, jump in here. Yeah, I agree with Mary on this. I mean, it's -- I think these should be individual panes, ideally with wood, and it's -- I mean, just because it's front-facing like that and so obviously not what it originally was, yeah, I don't think it looks good. Okay, well, I have a question. Would we be better to modify our motion to approve with that change or you want to just deny it and let him come back? I'm ambivalent. I mean, I don't care for the windows. I think we need to change them until we can deny them in which case he has to come back or we can approve it subject to that. But this is a pretty big change. I'm -- anybody -- let's talk about the awnings. Anybody have heartburn over the awning? I just didn't check the angle out. I'm sorry. I was so interested in the windows, I didn't see the proportionality to it. I mean, that's totally different than what was there, and that -- I'd love to hear what everybody else said, but before we go on, I mean, do we not have to continue on the motion? Well, I guess we denied it based on that. You're right. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Roy. You're right. Once discussion is done, we'll vote. Mary, we haven't designed -- not denied your motion yet. No, I know. I'm sorry. I didn't follow. No, it's still on the table. I was just trying to establish whether or not -- he was the one that took out those windows where they were already changed before he bought the property. And I think based on the pictures, the historical windows were there in 2020, if I understand the dates right. Is that correct, Cameron? That is correct. That's what I'm now understanding. Yes. That is correct. Okay. Any further discussion? Well, I would like some response to your question, Roy. Does it make a significant difference in what kind of hoops we leap through, whether we deny it or whether we approve it with those conditions? Ms. Berry, do you have anything to throw in here? Yeah, I was trying to get off of my phone and onto my computer, and now I was back home. Looking at this -- if somebody can let me in the Zoom for my home, I can look at this better. But looking at it previously, you know, I share the same concern about the consistency of the design in the front, and with regard to saying that those windows were there in 2020, were they there as a result of work that was done without the permit? And does that make a difference? I may have missed part of the discussion. Can you all still hear me? Am I frozen? No. No, we can hear you, Sandra. Okay. So when you said those windows were the ones that are pictured were there in 2020, was that done? Was it approved? Or was it like, okay, it's done? The ones that you saw that were on the right-hand side were the wooden windows. Let me get off of this one. There you go. See, the ones on the right are the ones that were there in 2020. The person that's redoing it just ripped them all out now in 2021 without approval and started doing stuff without approval, because it's easier to get forgiveness than permission. So I couldn't see what the windows looked like. If you look at the upper right one, you can see it's divided. I can see now that it is. Why is the proposed plan to have the new windows not duplicate what is on the right-hand side? What's the ...? Cassandra, so the proposed is this ... Can you see my screen? Uh-huh. Yes. The proposed is to replace what was current existing and replace it with multi-light double-hung windows. So multi-light does not mean individual pain. It just means that there's a window grid usually placed on the window itself. So it does meet our policies in terms of meeting the style, but in terms of the actual period, it can be up to discussion. Do we know the kind of windows that are going in? Aluminum, texture? We currently do not know the types of windows going in. We know that they're energy-efficient, and we just ask that they're not reflective. In terms of the glass, we ask that they're just not reflected, tinted, or mirrored, or plastic. It would have to be wood framing. Okay. Any further discussion? Did we not ever get an answer to your question, Roy? About the awning, I think that's what we were talking about. In looking at the pictures, the old awnings appeared to be canvas and circular or rounded, and the new ... I think they were metal. I think those were ... They were metal. Fashion metal. Correct. It was the period of the '50s kind of thing. It was the '40s, '50s somewhere. That's the existing and then the proposed. The proposed wooden roof awning appears to match the roof line and all that. Without being able to see what this thing would have looked like in 1925, I don't know whether that's period or not. It's reflective of many of the homes in the area. There are examples of a simple awning like this, but there's also examples of porches themselves with a similar roof and slope and pitch. This is more reflective of the period of the 1920s versus this metal awnings, as you see here. It does change the whole look of the front. It no longer has any awnings on the windows. The question is, what are we actually winding up with? What kind of Frankenhaus are we going to have here? Are we going to go for the style that was last there, or are we going to just ignore the awnings vanished on the windows? The metal awnings were a 1950s edition, right? So we're probably the windows too, but we don't know that for sure. The motion on the floor is to deny this application. We have a properly filed second, so why don't we just, how about we do name calls? Ms. Berry, yay or nay? Can you clarify that if you say yay, that means to deny? Yes. A yay vote is to deny the application. The motion is to deny, so we're voting yay would be to approve the motion, which is to deny. Yay, because I don't think I have enough information and want to move it forward. Okay. Melody? Yay. Evan? Yay. Lenny? Yay, but we didn't clarify what the awnings, what they were exactly going to look like and whether they were to match, and I think he needs to know that along with the denial. He needs to know what would be acceptable for awnings. Okay. I'm not sure the parliamentary move here, but why don't we just temporarily suspend voting and see if Cameron can clarify that. The awning he's proposing is 1920s period, and I think he's not coming back with any of the awnings over the windows, just the flat pitched inverted V. Is that correct, Cameron? Yes, that's correct. So he's matching the original roof line with its slope and pitch, and that is the awning that he's presenting. So that is the 1920s. He is not presenting kind of what is shown currently, which is more 1950s style. So I think based off that, that seems to be kind of where we're kind of mixed up in the discussion as whether we're wanting it to be a 1920s home or if we're looking to be a 1950s home. So I, yeah. Okay. So let's back up and just verify the vote. Any other questions while we're suspended? So are we saying that it's okay just to have the awning over the door and no window awnings? Is that what is understood to be a part of this motion? Well, okay. The motion denied sends him back to the drawing board where he has to redo his COA and bring something back. If we want to make suggestions, this would be the time to do it. Cameron, when he gets notification of rejection, do you explain to him what we didn't like? I can, but it would be more helpful if it was coming from you all, specifically what you're looking for, whether you're wanting it to be, if you all are looking for it to be more of the, like I said, the 1920s home that it originally was, or if you're looking for him to alter it and make additions that are similar to what we see in our 2020 façade. I might have a suggestion. There are pictures of old homes, even from before the Courtauld House burned down. There are tiny little postage stamp things that I've forgotten who saved them. I thought it was Dolores Vann, but I can't swear to it. They're about one inch by one inch. He could go back, and those are from the '40s, and look at that. That might support what he's up to. The fact that it's kind of this Franken style is kind of unsettling, and we don't really know where it's going. If he had one of those and showed that the awnings weren't there, it would be easy, right? My sense is that everybody would prefer us to be in the '20s with regard to the styling on this home. Yeah, I think so. That does not include awnings over the windows? Correct. Okay. I just think he deserves to clearly know what we were thinking, so that- Go ahead, Melody. Okay. I'm just listening to this, and it sounds like we have two issues that we need to address. First of all, we have the windows. We have to offer them some direction as to what we want them to do with those windows. If we're going to deny this, then we have to offer them some more specific instructions as to why we are denying this. I don't think that is an awning above the porch. I don't know that that can be classified as an awning if it is a solid structure that it's more of a roof, porch roof, than it is an awning. Is that correct? In terms of our DDC, we have awnings described more so as what's shown by the applicant. Porches are, in the DDC, described as supported by columns. That is why it's referred to as an awning, but it's a little messy in terms of what's shown in the DDC. It is labeled an awning in the DDC, but I understand what you're talking about in terms it is more of a porch roof. However, when we're discussing porches, it's usually supported by a column. Okay. All right. Okay. Any other questions? Yes. Well, I just have one other comment that might help the applicant come back when he's going to talk about the windows since we've kind of suggested the '20s kind of look. If he showed the frame around the windows that matched the style of a '20s house, might be useful because I don't remember what he showed, but it was very nondescript. I think the '20s style had a little ... My 1914 house has a little bit of trim around the edge that's a little bit decorative and not just plain flat boring. I think that that should be included. We might get that from that little snippet that was saved from the courthouse. It would make it look holistic. I don't want to come across as being mean, but tearing things down certainly doesn't lend one to getting a friendly review. We don't want to stop people from making money, but we do want them to keep in mind that this is our neighborhood. He probably doesn't live here and probably won't live here. I beg your pardon, but could we see it one more time? Sure. No problem. Lenny, which one ... Do you just want to see the photos of the facade or do you want to see the proposed? I want to see the proposed. Okay. Hold on a second. This is our proposed. Can you go back once more, Cameron? Yes. No problem. I was just trying to look at the little things at top and I can't really see them, but it does look like they're a little bit ... They're not square. They're kind of curved. Okay. Then to the proposed. Yeah. Those are so flat on it's hard to see what they are, but I think a little window detail would certainly be useful and awning ... What is the little support thing, the little bracket? Right. Yes. It's a wooden bracket, but no. Lenny, is it curved? What's the shape? You can see that the others are curved, but this could be a square bracket, right? Right. It could be kind of a curve, gently sloping. It should match the existing brackets. And back one more time. I was just going to look at the wood on the previous one. I know. Okay. Now I'm good. I'm happy now. Thank you. I just ... I couldn't believe that it was brick down here, to be honest, that that brick was actually ... I'm sure it wasn't original, but- Right. Okay. So back to our motion. We're going to start our vote over since we've had some discussion. The motion is to deny, and the reasons are that the windows don't properly match the period of the 20s, and that while ... And we would suggest that they add some period trim, perhaps, around the windows. I didn't hear a lot of objections about the awning, other than that it was plain that as long as the supports match the existing roof supports, it might look okay. So the motion is to deny, a yes vote means that you want to deny. We'll start with Mary this time. Yay. Okay. Lennie. Yay. Evan. Yay. Melody. Oh, she's muted, Melody. She's muted. Oh, it's okay. I can come back to you. I'm sorry. Yay. What is your question, Mary and Melody, since you're not clear or comfortable? I just pulled up the Zillow view of the house, and all of the windows, all of the wooden windows were not ... They were pained. I mean, they had pains in them, except the one was a ... They were pained windows on each side of a picture window. That's the left side as we look at it. Right. So would you like to suggest that they bring something back that more closely matches the original when they come back? Those look like wooden windows. I mean, just from the quality of this window that I'm looking at, and if we're going to ask them to bring it back as closely as possible, then it should match this picture of the wooden windows, the configuration of the wooden windows. Okay. I'm seeing a lot of nodding heads, so we'll include that in the instructions, and they obviously have the right to come back with whatever. Cassandra, what's your vote? Yay. Yay. Okay, Roy will vote yes, so it's unanimously denied. Okay, next up on our agenda is COA 21-0004, hold a public meeting and consider an application for certificate of appropriateness in accordance with Section 2.9.2 of the Dent Development Code to remove the flower boxes and replace the exterior ground floor windows at 120 West Oak, a local historic landmark, and a contributing building to the Denton County Courthouse Square National Register Historic District. The site is located on the northeast corner of North Elm Street and West Oak Street. Okay, Cameron, I'll let you take it from here. Okay. So, as the Chair stated, our next agenda item is at 120 West Oak Street. It's for the flower box removal and new windows. So here's a map. It's just showing 120 West Oak Street. It's on the northeast corner of North Elm Street and West Oak Street. The applicant is Maurizio Povici, and it was built in circa 1890. So the request is to remove existing flower boxes and replace with wooden paneling. They will replace the existing ground floor windows with 80% minimum visible light transmittance glass, which is the Denton Square District requirement. And this is also visible along West Oak Street. So from here, you can see the plywood panel that they're wanting to replace with the flower boxes. They would be replacing the green paint that is on the exterior of the building currently with this ivory tower. And then, as you can see from this proposed drawing, they'll have the existing front door repainted as well. It shows the plywood paneling, which is about 24 inches tall, and then the replacement of the glass. So just as a reminder, we have the Secretary of Interior Standards. And then in terms of Section 4.10.1 of the DDC, it specifies the purpose and overall intent of the Denton Square District. So the purpose is to preserve historic resources and build upon the image of the square as the historic vibrant and small town heart of a growing city. And then our overall intent is to encourage creativity and architectural diversity while ensuring the overall historic character, encourage and support preservation, support building designs and use of design elements in new or renovated buildings that maintain and continue the historic design patterns, support the use of materials, promote urban vitality, and encourage the integration of art into the public. So below are the two relevant architectural requirements from the Denton Square District Standards and Guidelines. These are the façade material standards, which list the primary materials as well as the following materials used for accents and trims, as well as the standards for ground floor windows. So staff recommends approval of the COA in request to replace the existing ground floor windows and remove the flower boxes. Any questions? Okay, the floor is open for questions. Can you show the two pictures again? I couldn't quite figure out what building it was. I didn't have time to drive by and figure out which one was 120. So what's in there now? Nothing? The plan is to replace it with a marketplace. Oh, there's the thing. I couldn't see on my phone what the pictures were now. And all they want to do is put up just white façade there instead? Is that what you're saying? They would like to do this ivory tower that is post façade color, and they would be replacing the flower boxes with the plywood paneling, which is more representative of what you see in the district currently. This is currently the only structure with flower boxes. Nice idea. Yes. But okay, any other questions for staff? Hearing none. Well, make sure you wave because you're pretty small on the screen. Okay, so our options are, one, approve is submitted, two, approve subject to conditions, three, deny, or four, continue the item. Staff recommends approval of this item. In order to do anything, we need to have a motion and a second. Before we do that, can I ask a question? They say they're going to replace it with plywood, and Cameron, I thought it was supposed to be like hardy board. I could have missed it, but that's what I thought I saw Evan nodding like that. Yeah, it said wood on the list was an acceptable material, and I don't know if that's supposed to encompass plywood as well. Yeah. So yes, it does imply that plywood is acceptable. Okay. Because it said accents and trim, and I took that as an accent, sorry. So yeah, this is accents and trim, but it includes the primary materials that listed up. Okay, I see. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. I move approval. Seconds. Okay, we have a motion and a second, and we'll enter into discussions. I'll open the floor. I can imagine it was pretty hard to keep that looking nice, great idea, but- Dead flowers. Yeah, I think this is a big improvement. An improvement, okay, hearing no other discussion, we'll call the vote, and we'll start with Ms. Berry? Yay. Melody? Yay. Evan? Yay. Lenny? Yes. Mary? Yes. And Roy likewise is yes. COA 21-0004 is approved unanimously. Okay, next up on our agenda is COA 21-0005, to hold a public meeting and consider an application for certificate of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton Development Code to construct a new house and relocate and reduce an existing two-story garage apartment to one-story located at 2230 West Oak Street within the West Oak Historic District. The site is located on the northeast corner of West Oak Street and Thomas Street. Okay, I'll turn it over to Cameron with this. Okay, so this COA 21-005, as our Chair stated, is at 2230 West Oak Street for new construction. So this is the West Oak Area Historic District. It is located on the northeast corner of Thomas and West Oak Streets, and the applicant and owners are Joe Paul and Sue Gallo, who should be on the call if you have questions after this presentation. So this is the existing site. It had amended final plat approval back in January 26, 2021, to combine both lots. The request is to relocate and reduce in stories the existing two-story garage apartment on-site, which is highlighted in red, as well as construct a new one-story house. The existing two-story garage apartment, which has two bedrooms and one bath upstairs and one bath, a studio and garage downstairs. The structure is proposed to be moved by Hitchcock House Movers and reduced to one-story, and it is proposed to become the accessory dwelling unit to the main structure. This is planned to have an engineered foundation. The structure is to remain stucco. It will not be visible from Thomas Street or West Oak Street, according to the applicant, and the applicant has stated that if cracks do form due to the move, it will be repaired to meet all requirements of DDC Section 4.9.6C. In regards to the one-story home, it will be 1,602 square feet. It will consist of three bedrooms, two bathrooms, and one side entry two-car garage from Thomas Street. The total square footage will be approximately 2,500 square feet under roof with the garage and porches. The style is a carpenter bungalow style house. The exterior materials to be used are siding would be cement plank and stone tile. The window would be multi-light double-hung windows, and the roof would be composition shingles. These are pictures of the stone tiling that would be used, which is also located here on the front facade, as you can see here. The cement plank, and then these are the color of siding proposed. The dormer and eaves would be this accent color right here. The trim color would be this white, and then this would be the side color. And then these are the windows examples that are proposed for the residents themselves. So, the staff recommends approval of the proposed COA request. And then, I have also brought the example of the visual, if I'm going to stop sharing real quick, just because it's better lighting of the stone tiling itself that's recommended on sections of the base of the front facade. Okay, questions for staff? This owner is not the owner that we saw short recently when for the demolition of a cute old '20s kind of building, it's a different owner. He wasn't flipping that, I see. Okay. So, this is purchased recently. It's not a Denton cab, is what I'm asking. Was the resident purchased recently, the property you mean? Yes. Does it show on Denton cab? I am not sure of when it was purchased. The two lots were combined in January of 2021, so I'm assuming sometime after 2021, it was purchased by the property owner. Cameron, actually the property owner purchased it about over a year ago, and he was the one that applied for the many final plat. So just don't know why it isn't shown up in BCAT yet, but this owner just purchased it within a year, year and a half. Could I see it again? I like pictures. Of course. Hold on. Oops. Okay. So, this is the proposed. And then we do have Angela Adams from the city, if anyone has questions about moving the current existing building onsite to the rear of the property, she is here to answer any questions you may have regarding that relocation. Okay. Any questions? Yes. Go ahead. I was just trying to see where that part is moved over. Where is it going to be? The current garage or a garage apartment will be moved to this location in the upper left hand corner of the property along Thomas street. Okay, okay. So it's supposedly not, this is not visible from Thomas or Oak, it's just, I find it hard to believe it's not visible from Thomas street. I can see maybe not from Oak, but how is it not visible from Thomas? They plan on putting landscaping and a fence in place to hide the accessory drilling unit. But there's a driveway there. I don't understand. You can't hide the driveway or did I just miss that? That driveway will be removed. That's the existing driveway. No, no, no. I'm talking about the new driveway. When they move it, there's still a driveway I see on the picture. It seems like there would be a driveway. I don't think that's making sense to me here. This lane, nobody can see what I'm pointing at, but I mean, what is that space? It doesn't give. It looks like an alley is what I think Lenny sees, kind of what I see. It's the gap between the two lots is that what I'm seeing I'm confused. It's not between the two lots, I don't think. Between the accessory dwelling and the house, there's like a gap, which I can't tell how big it is. It's not quite clear to me. And is there a fence on the Oak Street side of that accessory facility? On the Oak Street side, in terms of, so there is no fence along West Oak Street currently, and there's not proposed to be a fence? No, I don't mean along West Oak Street. I mean along that alley or whatever that is, it's no, on the other side, or this is Thomas Street. Yes. And the one that's parallel, this property that's parallel to Thomas, there's an alley or something in here that's parallel to Thomas? No, no, no. I was thinking there was one that was parallel to Oak running into Thomas, because there's just this gap. That's what I mean. I'm saying parallel to Thomas, parallel to Oak, you're right, right. Yes, it's parallel to Oak, and it's running into Thomas. What is that? This section right here? Move back a little bit. Yeah, to the right. Keep going to the right. Right here? Yeah. That is 20 feet from the property line. And keep going. But what is that? That's... Yeah, there's the whole thing. If I can interject, that is just showing dimensions. It's not an alley. That is just showing the dimensions, and you can see how they're noted by the feet that they're showing. Okay. By each of those lines. So where is this fence going to be? We are... The fence is not required by COA, but the fence would be along the property line. Well, if they're saying it's not going to be seen from Thomas Street. Well, I did inform them that if they did not end up putting a fence, they would have to come back to COA, so that it can meet the current facade of the new one-story home that is proposed. Can I ask a question though, Cameron? Can you build a fence that close to an accessory dwelling? Along the property line, it'll be 20 feet setback, so it will be along this line. Right on the street? Where's the... The street. Because you have to have a certain distance from the street in, is what I think, if there's a minimum... My other question relates to materials, because the house is not stucco, but this building which they claim can't be seen is. And I can't imagine that you won't see some of it, unless they're going to cover... I mean, without a fence plan, you're going to see the stucco, and you're going to see what they propose, kind of that black tile-ish stuff, and it just doesn't seem to go together. They look very odd. If I had the full look in at this, if you kind of stood on the corner of Oak and Thomas and looked back, you should be able to see links elsewhere in dwelling, unless the fence is prescribed carefully, and I don't see that happening right now, and the two materials don't match, or don't seem... Correct. Correct. They don't match currently, but I informed them that if we were able to end up seeing the accessory dwelling unit, they would have to come back to COA, and they would have to go in front of HLC again to discuss that accessory dwelling unit before it was occupied. I guess... But in their letter said that as soon as the other structure started up or something, they could occupy the back building. And there is no enforcement, let's just put it this way. So unless we actually say, "Now, you don't get COA until you tell us exactly what you're going to do," nobody's going to ever bother looking twice, and that's a problem with HLC. So I think if we don't have them come back and tell us, and Ron, and you can approve it, but unless it's specifically stated, I've gotten a little tough about this because I've lived here long enough, and I'm one of the longest serving members besides Roy. And in fact, Roy, you and I saw this before it was torn down, right? Did we take the tour with Roman? Yes. Yeah, exactly. And so I think that we should prescribe where the fence should cover in advance so we don't have to have this discussion coming back. Okay. Well, what I'm hearing, it just seems to me like we need more information than we have. Maybe we're okay with it, maybe we're not, but we can't tell. Is that sort of where everybody is at? Yeah. And I'm also asking for what a carpenter, I've never heard of a carpenter bungalow, and I don't know that that tile is characteristic of a carpenter bungalow, Melody, are you here? Yes. Can you tell me about that? I've never heard of that tile on the front of a bungalow. I've heard on buildings like, you know, granite buildings and grand old bank buildings and stuff, but I've never seen it on a house. And is this house representative of the historic district, does it match the style of something that would be expected to see in the historic district? Okay, so Melody, you're muted, I think. There we go. Hello. Got you. Okay, my dog just went off. So that's why I did that. Oh, okay. It is representative of a bungalow style house. Typically that would not be a tile, because at the time that that style of house was popular, it would not have been available, but it might have been a brick substance rather than a tile. That would have been the accent piece. So this is a modified version of a traditional style. I mean, they're doing their due diligence in trying to build something that will blend in but still meet the style that they want to have. And that's the way it appears to me. And this the tile that they have chosen, rather than putting brick, it's just a modernization of an old, older home style. And I just wanted to let you all know that I believe Joe, Paul Gallo should be on the call now. So if you have any specific questions for him, you can direct some of the questions for him if you have specific ones. Okay, this should be a good time for that. Joe, are you on the call? Were we able to get him on the call? Okay. Cameron, this is Stuart with the city. I believe he just called our public line and I gave him the Zoom call-in information. And so he should be calling in shortly. Okay. Thank you. Sorry for that delay there. Okay, so at this point, are there any other questions for staff? Hearing none. Well, we have four options here, and any of these four require a motion. We can approve as submitted, approve subject to conditions, deny or continue the item. I believe he just called our public line and I gave him the Zoom call-in information. I believe that might be him on the line now. Joe, is that you? And if it is, if you could please turn down the meeting. Okay, Joe, are you here? Yes, sir, I'm here. Okay, so we had a couple of questions for you if you have just a minute. Why don't I just throw the floor open and you know, Melanie, I think you had questions. I think Mary had a couple of questions. Anybody else just go ahead. Well one question was, we were questioning how it would be, how the auxiliary structure would be hidden from Thomas Street if there was no barrier on the south side. Not the south side of the property, but the south side of that building. Carmen, can you pop up the site plan? Carmen, did you hear? Can y'all hear me? Yes, we can hear. Hold on a second. I'm bringing that up now. Here we go, this is the site plans. Joe Paul, are you able to see it? No, I don't. Just a reminder, the applicant is about 15 seconds behind from viewing, 10 to 15 seconds. Okay. Do you see it now? No. Okay. Yeah, if you'll go to the site plan. I am currently on the site plan. Okay, to clarify the fence issue and the auxiliary dwelling, there is at this point right now an older fence that was apparently a brick wall that is there, which is off the property line and the house would be located 20 feet off the Thomas line and 10 feet off the back line. That fence will cover all the way down to this auxiliary driveway here. There's two entries in the driveway. It's a circle driveway. There'll be also a fence that will come across basically I would say this around the 24 area or the 20 area that will box in this home and the individual will be able to park where the 24 is in the offset of the property line using the existing driveway there. So there'll be a gate there and the home will be totally enclosed by a fence. I guess I'm having real trouble visualizing parking and parking in this area is very difficult, but if you were going to have a home and an accessory dwelling, what is the rule for how many parking spaces you must require for dwellings? Four parking spaces must be required in addition to the garage itself. I can't see that here, that's why I'm asking. It's not clear where this is going to happen and how that blocks out a Stucco house that's not the same. A Stucco building is not the same as the house materials. Explain that please. Yes, go ahead. I'd like a picture. I'd love a picture. Okay. On the 20 foot marker and the 27 foot marker, there will be a fence there and a fence on the back of the red line facing on the east side, the west side, and the north side will have a fence. Actually, it'll be a fence on north, south, east, and west with a gate. And if you'll look, Carmen, if you'll go up to the north entry on the driveway, there's probably, let me give you the dimensions, there's roughly 30 feet right in the area between 20 and 24 on a marker that can park two cars easily. So they'll be able to park in front of the fence, go into the gate, and still have a 20 foot roughly or 18 foot front yard on there protected by a fence. Okay, and then they'll pull through the curb entrance for the loop driveway? Yes, sir. That's correct and be facing north to a gate. Okay, thank you. Do you have other questions? And what was the material, again, Cameron, could you show us of the house itself? Yes. So, we would have a cement plank siding with the stone tiling at the base. And then these would be the colors chosen for the dormer eaves trim and siding color. And then these would be the window examples for the windows to be used on the exterior. What about those windows, again, what would the color, where the white is on those windows would be black or dark gray or something? I also have colors. I'm having a hard time visualizing them, sorry. I have colors. I'm a real visual person. No worries. I have colors for those as well. Can you see my screen? Yes, I see your screen. Okay, so this is the dormer and eaves color. Hopefully that's a little bit brighter than what's shown on the screen. And then this is the trim color. Oh yeah, much brighter. And then our siding color is this lighter gray. Okay. Which one? The third one? Yeah. Okay, any other questions for our owner or for staff? Hearing none. Okay, so where we're at is we have four options. We can approve as submitted, approve subject to conditions, deny or continue. Any of those requires a motion and a second. So do we have a motion? I have a motion. I'd like to, well, I'd like to approve with conditions. Conditions being that the site plan of all of the hiding and hiding the house, stucco house is actually clearly legible on the site plan. I can't follow waving the hands orally. It doesn't help. And that all of the four necessary vehicle places are specifically pointed out so that they don't block potential access by the sidewalk that might appear on city right of way. Just so that that's actually clear. And given that, then I think they would have to have those conditions now. Okay. So Mary's motion is to approve with conditions and her conditions are that the site plan can be modified to show where the fence and parking would be. And is that a fair. Yes. I bet you can't see the stucco house since the materials were so different from any, any angle that is there. Okay. I think we understand the conditions. So to go forward, the motion would need a second. Second. Okay. We have a motion and a second from Lenny. Now we move to discussions. I'll open the floor. Evan, we covered it pretty well already. Okay. All right. That's fine with me. Okay. So we've had a motion and a second. The motion is to approve with conditions. The conditions are that the site plan would be updated to reflect the fits and the visual to assure ourselves that it will not be visible from Oak or Thomas street. We'll start at. Wait. And also that the parking is, oh, that the parking is delineated on the site. So that it does not take over part of the city right of way so that eventually a sidewalk got put in, the parking is not on the sidewalk. Okay. Are there any questions of staff about these conditions? Seeing no. None. We'll start to vote. Let's go with Mary. Mary, do you have a suggestion? Yes. Okay. I'm a little confused of how you want to designate. Do you just want the fence dimensions and the parking spaces placed onto the site plan? Is that what you're asking? No, we can't see. I mean, you've described it, but you know, pictures worth a thousand words. So what would happen is you would need to probably change your site plan to include those and satisfy the staff that our conditions have been met and then you would be approved to move on to your next permit. It's basically all we want. Right, but I guess she's asking for a visual. I don't understand how we can show a visual with no home being there. All we want is to be sure that whatever, that parking is off street and that it does not impinge upon a sidewalk that might be built in the future along that street. We need to see, it needs to show where exactly the parking is and you just have to pardon that we can't visualize very well when you tell us. And where the fence is actually going to go. Telling me where the fence is, is not the same as drawing the lines. Okay. So I guess that's all I'm asking is you just want to show a line where the fencing will go. Right. Yes. And then you would need to, but you don't come back to us. You would work with Cameron and Ron and the staff to make sure that they, because I believe they understand what our concerns are and then you move along. So okay, I understand fully. All right, Mary, your vote. Yes, Lenny. Yes. Aye. Evan. Yeah. Melody. Aye. Cassandra. Yay. Yay. Roy is yay. So this motion passes unanimously. It is approved subject to the conditions that the parking be clarified and that the fence be clarified and staff will work with our owner to make sure that that meets our concerns. Next up on our agenda is COA 21-0005 to hold a public meeting and consider an application for a certificate of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton Development Code to construct, oh, pardon me, sorry, we did that one, HL 21-0001 to hold a public meeting and determine whether the presented expenses resulted in a permanent improvement or restoration of a local historic landmark property located at 1003 West Oak Street within the West Oak Historic District. This site is located on the south side of West Oak Street, mid-block between North Welch and Denton Street. Okay, Cameron, I'll turn it over. So, as the Chair stated, our next agenda item is 1003 West Oak Street. It's for historic tax exemption. So it is in the Oak Hickory Historic District. It is on the south side of West Oak Street, mid-block between North Welch and Denton Streets. The owners are Salty and Joanne Rochelle. It is a local historic landmark, as well as a THC-recorded historic Texas landmark, other ones known as James Newton and Ava Taber Razor House. It was built circa 1909. They request an application for historic landmark tax exemption under section 10-128. It is for HVAC system updates and a new rear porch, as you can see on the slide. The total cost came out to $28,659.48. So the recommendation, if you look at section 10-128D, it is for additional 10-year exemption for the property owner to demonstrate to city qualifying expenses of $10,000 or more, beyond those demonstrated for the initial or subsequent exemption. So on April 13, 2010, they were approved for a new roof and minor wood repairs and repainting. So that is what they originally got their tax exemption for. So this would be, as I stated, an extension of that tax exemption. Also, according to city records, no building permit was obtained for the electrical work done to the porch. So staff recommends a favorable determination that the expenses do result in a permanent improvement and/or restoration of the landmark property. However, staff does recommend that the total cost of improvements be reduced by a minimum of $50, which is the starting fee for electrical permits for residences. Okay, let's open it for questions of staff. How do you know there was electrical work on the porch? These electrical light fixtures right here, they're on the top of the posts and under here on the lighting. So those require a building permit. Do they have a building permit for the porch? Building permit is not required for the porch, just the electrical work. I see. Okay. Wow. I learned something new today. Thank you. So they just thought that adding those lights didn't matter. Correct. Well, that's not totally unreasonable. I wouldn't have thought so. I wouldn't have thought I needed it for that, so I guess I just, as I said, I learned something new today. Yes. Okay. Any other questions? Hearing none. In this particular instance, our options are, one, make a favorable finding of improvement. Two, make an unfavorable finding of improvement, deny or continue the item. Go ahead. I was just going to move a favorable finding. Second. Okay. We have a motion and a second. That opens the item for discussion. I'll open the floor. I'm fairly sure he spent more than what is listed on there doing all of the work. It's a continuous process. It's right across the street from my house. It's a constant process. He's always improving the house. I have no doubt he spends at least that much. Okay. We have a motion to make a favorable finding of improvement. Any other discussion? Hearing no one nodding, we'll call the vote. This, pardon me for one minute. Okay. Let's start with Mary. Yes. Janelle's gone. Lenny. Yes. Cassandra. Yay. Melody. Yes. Evan. Yay. And Roy is yay. So this item is we make a finding unanimously. Favorable finding of improvements in the amount requested. Okay. Now that I believe concludes our agenda for today. I think city attorney would prefer that we have adjourned by motion. So if we have a motion for adjournment and a second, we can vote. See you in a moment. Second. Motion and a second. All those in favor wave at the screen. That's unanimous. So we are done for the day. Thank you, everybody. Take care. Take care.