Okay, well then noting that we have a quorum, we're going to convene the
regularly scheduled meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission on Monday,
March 21st. Let's start by standing and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in the
Texas Court. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. On the Texas side, I pledge allegiance to the team, Texas, one state under God, one indivisible.
Thank you. We're going to have a little note about, since we have inclement weather, the possibility of severe storms. If you'll go ahead and sort of fill us in on what happened.
Absolutely, and thank you for this opportunity for just taking this administrative privilege. Tina Fergens, deputy director of development services and planning director. So given the inclement weather that's happening this evening, in the event that tornado sirens do go off, we do have a storm shelter inside our building.
So what we will do is just quickly recess our meeting and we staff will escort everyone to our storm shelter that we have. It's on the opposite end of our building here, but we'll escort you there and we'll just wait it out and then we can always reconvene our meeting. We'll note the time as well that we reconvene and then finish conducting our business. So thank you.
Thank you. So let me ask you one other question. Will the sirens be pretty obvious sitting in here?
I hope so. This is my first experience in inclement weather here in Denton. So I think between Hillary and myself, we'll make sure that we listen for that while you're conducting the meeting.
But for our commissioners, if storm starts occurring and you get nervous, we're better safe than sorry. Okay, so the first item for consideration on our agenda tonight is HLC 22-028 to consider approval of the March 17, 2022 minutes. Now I want to point out we've contributed to everyone.
Essentially corrected. There were a couple of corrections in the minutes that were sent out. They're going via email. I think that catches, I think that catches everything.
But I want to get settled. Okay, so since there are corrections, corrections are essentially in paragraph one, the original sent minutes said that our last meeting was Monday, March 17.
And it is, it was Thursday and the heading was regular meeting when in fact, it was a special call meeting. And under item 2B, the staff recommendations were added into the minute so that they reflected what more accurately happened here. So you can have a motion.
I am on approval of the minutes of March 17th meetings. Do you have a motion? Is there a second? Do we have the amended ones? Do you have the amended minutes? So these were the ordinance and matrix that Tina passed on.
So we don't have them in the minute. I just haven't seen the changes. And here's another set in case you want to pass it around.
Yes, I'm taking a little extra time here because these are officially recorded and they are more legal in nature, but okay, so we've had a motion in a second. Any other questions or yes, ma'am.
Excuse me, Roy, if I could please clarify with the motion that was made, was that to approve the corrected minutes? Yes, yes.
All right, we've got a motion in the second. Those in favor say aye and raise your right hand. Second up is on our agenda is HL 22-0002, hold a public meeting and determine whether the presented expenses resulted in a permanent improvement or restoration of a local historic landmark.
And record of Texas, historic landmark property located at 607 Pearl Street in the okay Hickory, the sort district. The site is located on the South side of Pearl Street between Denton and Carol Boulevard.
Mr. Robertson, I'll turn it over to you. Thank you, chair. As stated, this is 607 Pearl Street for historic tax exemption.
So, this is South side of Pearl Street between Denton Street and Carol Boulevard. The owner is David and Catherine McGray.
Um, it's historic designation. Currently, it's a local historic landmark, also known as the Simmons Maxwell House circa 1915. Um, it's also recorded Texas, historic landmark.
So, the application is for historic landmark tax exemption, according to our section 10-128. It is for a series of repairs and updates, as you all saw in your packet.
But here are a few spray foam insulation replacement of six windows, removal of broken toilet carpet and refinishing of hardwood floors, cabinet door hardware, backslash build and install bomber doors, custom countertops, sink and faucet.
So, all these repairs and updates that were made, um, this was, um, amounted to $46,661.95.
So, this is a before picture. So, this is the third floor before, and then this is the third floor after those repairs and updates were made.
So, staff analysis, as I stated, um, this is record, um, looks at section 10-128D, which is talking about that additional 10-year, um, exception that is required for the property owners to demonstrate for the city to qualify expenses of $10,000 or more beyond those demonstrated for the initial or subsequent exception for permanent improvements, uh, and/or restoration.
So, staff is recommending a favorable determination that the expenses presented resulted in a permanent improvement and/or restoration of the landlocked property at 6 or 7 false straight. Any questions?
I have a question. On the whole list of improvements that were made, did all of those, because we had this before and not everything qualified, but what did qualify still met the qualifications of the $10,000.
I was just wondering if all of those that staff, seeing that all of those were appropriate for it, in particular, the handrail was one that I'm thinking that doesn't do anything for the structure.
Right.
So, that was just my question.
Um, so staff did look at this more from all the work that was done as a whole, um, rather not, so, obviously, cabinet indoor hardware, not necessarily does apply, maybe not necessarily backslash, but that is something for the HLC to really kind of determine on your, as a discussion here, if whether or not you think these all apply, um, as stated, as you probably saw in your packet, there is, um, it does not necessarily break down the cost of all those individually, it's the cost as a whole.
So that didn't make staff analysis a little bit complicated, um, but that's something we can have a discussion about regarding this.
Do we need a motion? It's like, yes, at this point, we run through and make sure we have just questions that are factual in nature and that, but we can also expand that. So the other questions for staff, just for clarification, uh, they don't need to be all a part of.
Historic influence or improvement, just $10,000 worth of them need to be, is that correct?
So it could be improvements and or permit rehabilitation, and that is kind of, um, not to go too far off agenda, but that's why in the past we had a definitions ad hoc committee that was to discuss these.
So it's kind of trying to determine what do we consider improvement to a historic property? What do we consider rehabilitation to a historic property? How do we want to define those two things and do for instance, you know, um, at a closet space and repaired ceiling, does that count as an improvement or does that count as rehab?
Does a, you know, spray foam installation, does that count as improvement or rehab or, you know, cabinet indoor hardware? Can you really say that's improvement or rehab or do you not want that to be defined by our definition? So that's kind of the larger discussion we're having here.
Well, I'd say the added closet is definitely an improvement. Okay, but we can certainly, when we get to the discussion part, we can roll that around, I suppose. So our options are to make a favorable finding of improvement.
We certainly can limit the expenses that qualify. We can deny it or we can continue the item. Do we have a motion?
I move that we approve this request.
Okay, in total? Yes. Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second?
Having no second.
Um, okay. So at this point, we don't have a motion on the floor. Let's open it once again to questions for Cameron. Yes, sir.
Is it a requirement or state anywhere that expenses need to be itemized when submitted to the-
And these are?
We just require a receipt stating that these have been paid in full. So if they were doing this as one whole project, they wouldn't necessarily have to itemize it if they're doing a bulk sum.
Okay, so do we have an alternate motion? All right, hearing none, then-
I'll second the original motion simply to open the discussion if possible.
Okay. All right, so we have a motion and a second. So now we move on to discussion. I'll just open the floor, since there aren't any points here, Gary.
There definitely seems to be an issue with this specifically, just because there are things on there that I don't think would qualify under our analysis.
And just looking at it, it's like, okay, there are things in there that probably means $10,000 that do qualify, but without having it broken down, it's hard to say exactly what that's going to total out to.
I'm in agreement with you, and I don't know if at a future date that we need to revisit this topic again for guidelines, which with new commissioners on board, I think that that's something I would like us to look into, but for this particular one, I'm in agreement with Kacen.
I think there are several things on here that do not qualify. There's several things that do, and, you know, a couple of them in particular may have hit that $10,000, but without having an itemized report of that, I-
I think there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever, having had repairs done a couple of times to houses, that there are items on there that go far beyond the $10,000 that may be- that will qualify.
But if in the future we had a submission for say, like, $15,000, and there were different things like this, it would be necessary for us to know which ones fell into that definition and those that didn't, especially being that close to the $10,000 amount, I would think.
Well, then I would think that we would need to change the rules and specify that as a condition that we break down those expenses.
Yeah, I agree. I don't want to move the goalposts on people looking to get this exemption.
Well, so my question is, I think, don't- we had an ad hoc- because we addressed this, I think, in October, September, October, and we had an ad hoc committee which I wasn't- were you on that case? I don't know if it was done. I was on the other two, resigned. Oh, so we don't really- okay, and there was a discussion that we were going to limit the expenditures to those that preserved, repaired, replaced items that made the structure historic in the first place.
Like the roof and the porches and the exterior that- or the framing, but it says specifically in, I think, our- that air conditioning and HVAC repairs and the structural foundation things clearly apply, but- and so I think we're at a point where we might want to reconsider the ad hoc committee to get a little guidance so we can hand out to people that are here.
I do- I am sensitive. I mean, we do have some detail in the bill. Unfortunately, there's just a general remodeling, $28,000 and a whole lot of add-ins and subtractions. I did not run the tape on it, but it's probably-
Roy, that's where my confusion came in, too. I don't know, because I mean- so we're open for discussion. The spray foam insulation, I can definitely see where that is an enhancement to the home. That alone probably has a pretty large bill with it, not $10,000, but probably-
$6,000.
Six- so it's pretty large. And then you add some of those others. So if you had that $6,000 there, because I don't have that with me, Roy, I think-
It's $6,000 plus there's $2,200 for working on some windows. And then electrical and lighting, which we're upgrading, I think, to the can LED lights. That was $1,100. Then there were an additional framing and repair the beam, it looks like, for $2,300.
So all of those add up to more than $10,000, plus you'd think some percentage of the general remodeling bill, which was just under $30,000. You're almost certainly going to get above $10,000 with the rational approach to that, but perhaps we need to, after our agenda or at an appropriate time, revisit our ad hoc and let's get some guidance we can give people.
Okay, any other items of discussion?
Given that information, does anybody have any doubt whatsoever that they've met $10,000 on qualifying improvements or upgrades?
I don't have doubt with that. The only thing I'm going back to is that we just approved one, and we specifically said they added something as signage and the signage didn't qualify.
So I just want, we do a motion to say, however we think these certain things do not qualify, but they qualified for the $10,000. Does that make sense on how we did it previously? I think that helps set a consistency for the commission here to be able to give some guidance for people.
Okay, so would you like us to amend this motion to specifically exclude from approved expenses the black pipe handrail, the cabinet doors and hardware, backsplash, bomber doors, things of that nature, or you really want to get in?
No, no, no, no. I guess my point is we don't have enough on this to know. I mean like when you say the drywall, additional drywall and storage, we don't have enough backstory to know would that qualify, would it not qualify? It could. I don't know.
And that's a good point, and we just don't know. And so our options, I think, are to say, well, we feel okay about approving this given the amount of the expenditure, or do we send it, because we can always deny it and they can come back housing.
They would have to wait a year. Or we could approve it subject to... If it's continued, does the procedure permit them to supplement their application? Yes. But we have to make a decision about what...
Can we find $10,000 that we know for sure just to approve it based on those alone? The insulation, the exterior paint, those are two that I think clearly fall under.
Okay. So the motion is to approve, but to have a finding of a favorable... I'm losing mine.
I did it exactly right. Make a favorable finding of improvement. Yes. Favorable finding of improvement. As clarification, I did a little research after our last meeting, and what happens is you get a 50% discount on the city of debt and taxes on your own.
Okay, so I looked at the tax rate, and so for every... If you have $200,000 on our house, then your discount would be $100,000 in value, and that is $565 of tax per year for 10 years. So that's the quantity.
Oh, it's not as small as I think I was mistakenly originally thinking. Okay, so motion. All those in favor say aye or raise your hand. Aye. Oh, yeah, one, two, three, let's see that.
But I think we need to move on the other issue. I agree. So that doesn't come up again, and I think it's important that when an applicant goes through the trouble to follow all the instructions that we have given them, that are available to them, then it's rather unfair to send them back just to do some more when we realize we didn't give them good enough direction to begin with.
So, yeah, that probably needs to be a future agenda item. Well, we can cover that in more detail in the work session part of our meeting, which is after the public part of our meeting. Okay, next agenda item.
I have a question. Yes, could you please repeat when we approve the item B approval as favorable finding? Yes, we had a unanimous favorable finding on item B. Okay, thank you.
Okay, before we move on, is everyone good on that? Yes.
Our next item C is hold a public meeting and consider an application for a certificate of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the debt development code to replace exterior windows at 520 North Austin Street, a local historic landmark.
The site is located at the intersection of North Austin Street and East Congress Street on the southeast corner on the southeast corner. I'll turn that over to Ms. Robertson. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
So, as stated at 520 North Austin Street, which is southeast corner of North Austin Street and East Congress Street, the owners are Mike and Beata Dupree, and the construction is circa 1921.
So, the building's history, this is a photo from the 1940s and the present day today. It's a crossing bungalow style, so it has that low pitched roof with unenclosed eave overhangs, prairie style windows, a covered front porch, and double hung windows.
So, the request proposed project is an in-kind replacement of 32 prairie style windows, and the location is on the main building's exterior as shown.
So, the current conditions, the windows are in poor condition and not very energy efficient, nonfunctional due to multiple layers of paint ceiling windows, broken panes and fogging present on multiple of the windows, missing screens in multiple areas, as well as single pane windows, which are energy inefficient, resulting in high energy bills and the inability to maintain reasonable temperature inside.
So, these are the existing windows as shown on the house. And then, the design that's proposed are prairie style windows with the white double hung windows and a vinyl construction as shown here. This is an example of those windows.
So, just to run you all through, so this is kind of this before, if you saw in your packet, the app pit has already replaced these windows on their property. So, these are some before images of what the property looked like with those original windows, and then these are afterwards. So, some of the prairie style windows as you see here are replaced here in the back as well.
So, staff's analysis, it was based off the standards for rehabilitation, so that's Secretary of Interior Standards for the treatment of historic properties, and what staff focused on were points two, three, five, six, and nine.
And one of the things that I want to draw HLC's attention to is specifically number six, because in the past we've kind of had discussions about material uses on windows.
And what I'm highlighting here is that what is stated by the Secretary of Interior Standards for rehabilitation is that new features will match the old in design, color, texture, and where possible, the materials.
So, currently, those proposed windows that have been implemented do match the old in design, color, and texture. So, they're white, they're prairie style, double hung, and they're that, I think, slick texture due to the paint.
However, the proposed windows do not utilize the wooden frames as they did on the original. As stated by that hint, you know, they're non-functional due to the multiple layers of paint, the panes are broken and fogging, there's missing screens, and single pane windows are energy inefficient.
So, vinyl construction, as stated, as you all saw in your packets, it will not rot, crack, peel, or warp, and it's more durable and, as a result, provides lower overall future maintenance for the homeowner.
So, staff's analysis, as stated in the AIS, they have been replaced the windows, but staff is working to internally correct this problem because the building permit was issued prior to the COA being reviewed and approved, potentially, by HLC.
So, staff, myself, has met with our Building Safety Division plans examiners to talk about this process and how the COA should always come first before the building permits themselves.
We've talked about a standard operating procedure, and we've also worked on updating our historic property restriction in our city's community development system.
And some of the things that staff is working to do on educating historic homeowners is, right here, these are some informational postcards that I'm actually going to have being sent out this week to historic property owners, stating,
"Learning about more historic preservation in Denton, property owner responsibilities, local historic tax exemptions," so I'm providing my information there, and also working to add more information to our Preserve Denton Instagram page.
So, based off that recommendation, staff does recommend approval subject to conditions of the Certificate of Appropriateness request to replace the 32 main resident windows at 520 North Austin Street.
As a proposed project, it does meet the Secretary of Interior's standards for rehabilitation.
Staff is recommending, though, that the applicant moving forward acknowledge that a COA is required before a building permit can be approved and issued.
Any questions?
I have a question. You said the Secretary of Standards, yes, that you have, like-kind and like-kind, how is that, to me, the vinyl is not like-kind, so how is that approved through that?
That's not the standard, the Secretary of Interior Standards, where do they make that correlation, that vinyl versus wood?
They don't specifically state that, they just ask specifically where possible that the original materials that were there be reused or a new construction of that, using those same materials.
So, they don't specifically say you can switch wood for vinyl or anything, but their main focus is where possible, it's not necessarily tying them, it's a guideline.
So, it's a preference of a homeowner, depending on financial costs, depending on efficiency, 32 windows is very substantial.
So, but yes, so these are guidelines and they are considered standards, but there's nothing necessarily tying a homeowner to that.
Except that like-kind, that's what gets made.
Just so that I'm clear, this homeowner came and did a permit, a P&Z permit and got a permit, right?
So, the applicant is here, if you do have questions for him, sorry. Yes, sir.
But, so, it wasn't through Planning and Zoning Commission, it's through our building permits.
Okay, so we got a permit and they installed the windows, at this point they're in there.
Correct, yes, I drove by and saw them. I did too, I drove by today too, they look nice.
I'll also do discussion later if I have discussion. Okay, so any other questions for staff?
I'm a quiet bunch today. Okay, so our options here are to approve as submitted, approve subject to conditions, deny the item or continue the item.
And I make note that staff does recommend approving it subject to two conditions, hope to the condition that the applicant moving forward acknowledges COAs required before a building permit can be approved and initiated.
Okay, so. If we deny. Excuse me? If we deny, what happens?
Okay, my understanding is you'd have to then take his application for City Council and they would either approve or deny and if they say no, then he's got to back up and start the process over again, in which case he might have to pull it through windows.
Actually, sorry, we have a slightly different review on that from Marsala. Basically, the code is silent on the HLC's ability to do anything punitively, I suppose, to the homeowner in the event of a denial because the drafting just didn't contemplate this scenario.
So really, substantively, not much happens if there's a denial, other than this project isn't properly papered.
There, it's not something we're necessarily posted for, but this could be treated as an ordinance or a code violation.
And that is something that I understand from Marsala is posted for a work session later to talk about bringing enforcement actions.
So it's something that can be discussed in the future. Rather than denial, the appropriate course might be an enforcement action if the Commission feels it's appropriate.
I'll make a motion to deny.
Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Okay, now I believe that is Mr. Dupree here right now? So we have the homeowner here if we have any additional questions for him.
We need to do that during discussion, correct?
Yes. All right, so that's correct. I'll make a motion to approve COA 22-0002, subject to staff recommendations.
Okay. So we're clear. We had a motion to deny that failed for a lack of a second.
Okay, now we've had a motion to approve subject to conditions that are the staff recommendations, which are to ask the homeowner to acknowledge that he needs to get the COA before he does any additional work.
We've had a second by Ms. McAdams. Motion to second the discussion.
So I'll explain why my motion was to deny. It wasn't because of the getting the COA. It was because using the vinyl instead of the wood and using it because it's where you can't.
And to me, the wood could have been used, but it would, and I think we've had this a long part of this commission for years, is that people do things and then they come back and say, oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know.
And things are done and sometimes not done within the commission's rules. So I'm going with the like kind. I would be, I'm fine with the windows being replaced, the double paints. I'm fine with all that. What I'm not fine with isn't being mine.
Well, and if you recall, there are instances where we've asked the homeowner to specifically use wood on the parts of the home that are, you can walk up to and less so on second story windows and on rear facing windows.
This structure is on a corner. So you see the front of the house and you see the side of the house.
So I wanted to explain that. It didn't have anything to do with the COA coming in later. It was really the materials used.
Okay, so here's my question. It's two questions. One is from the street, can you tell the difference between wood and vinyl?
I think the average person would not.
And if it's going to be new material, it's not the historical material. I don't see the value in saying, well, it needs to be new wood versus new vinyl, especially if it doesn't make an appearance difference.
I guess I'm just not seeing the problem.
Yeah, I'm the one with the integrity of the historic home because it's historic, the age of it, what it does.
I mean, it's not historically.
No, it's new wood.
But in that era, they used wood they didn't have vinyl. So I think so I'm going that's where I'm going alongside with.
Good description. Anyone else?
Well, last week we had an instance in which some windows were pulled and then reused as part of this dish.
So is that not a possibility? And our art would not be appropriate to have a mixture of vinyl and wood.
Well, the old window no longer exists. Our homeowner can confirm that.
And they do make vinyl windows that have a wood facade.
There was other options. I think that's my angus. There was other options that could have been brought before us.
Okay, we had a motion, a second and discussion. Any further discussion?
All those in favor?
We might be real happy as vinyl right now.
That's a good point. But it has been something that this commission has struggled with because our preference, strong preference is that if you were going to pull out a wood window,
but you put a wood window back in there, even though it's wood clad and vinyl and the rest of this modern.
But because of the intent of the Secretary of Interior's standards.
But again, I think either we say that so they know going in what is required or we don't try to enforce it.
Well, I think it is. But I think they did it before they got a CLA.
It doesn't require it. You know, the language says where is where possible.
If you were here, I mean, if we were here at the start of this project, we very well might ask them to do some work. I find that.
Okay, go ahead.
Oh, so I was just bringing it up in case you guys want to look at it again.
So this is specifically that section that we're discussing the where possible materials.
I had a question for the homeowner, when you went and got a permit for this, did anybody bring up that you use certificate of appropriateness or anything of that sort?
No, in fact, I submitted the application for certificate of appropriateness and I personally have never applied for a permit for these windows.
The contractors applied for and I received that permit a week after within a week of submitting the application.
And I admit I'm a little naive to this process, so I thought permits done and the windows were installed.
And then I realized, well, the process is not complete when it came and reached out to me for additional information about the house.
I think given those circumstances, I mean, the fact that even without the guidelines of this commission and the state historical guidelines,
you still made an effort to keep the aesthetic look of the period on the house and shows appreciation for the for the historic nature and the style.
And I appreciate that. It's a beautiful, I really appreciate that as well.
That's why I asked if we denied what would happen, because my thought process with this is if we did not, he didn't have to take his windows out.
But we're sending a presence that we're not going to go along with where you could put use wood and you did.
That's why I specifically asked that question.
Robert, I don't think we know the answer there right now. It sounds like it's a question about what really happens when it happens.
So the code is silent on the HLC's ability to force someone to tear it out.
I'm just covering for Marcella, so I haven't done any deep dive up research.
So I would encourage us to bring that question back from Marcella for a detailed, authoritative response.
What I know is that right now, today, we can't order him to rip his windows out.
And I wouldn't want that. I agree with Casey.
I think you did a beautiful job on trying to keep the integrity of the windows with the same of the air.
It's just that final part. That's why I was thinking.
And to be clear, the motion to deny did not receive second, and it's not being discussed at the moment.
OK, so we have a motion to approve subject to conditions.
All those in favor, let's do this from my hand only. Raise your right hand.
We have one, two, three, four, and five, and one.
Those opposed, raise your hand.
Sorry, we didn't just get you.
OK, motion passes.
And so now moving on.
Item D. Oh, and by the way, to the homeowner, thank you for taking time to come down on a dark and stormy day driving me.
Appreciate your time.
This is HL 22-0003, hold a public meeting and determine whether the presented expenses resulted in a permanent approval
or restoration of a local historic landmark property located 805 Oliver Street. The site is located on the northwest corner of Oliver Street and Panhandle Street.
So it is at 805 Oliver Street, northwest corner of Oliver Street and Panhandle Street, and the owners are Ken and Melissa Bradley.
So it does have a local historic landmark designation. It's the Barrow House, which is circa 1940.
So the application is for historic landmark tax exemption according to section 10-128.
The repairs and updates that were made were a roof update, and this costs $38,621.
So this is the original roof here on the left, and then we have our new roof here on the right.
So staff analysis was according to section 10-148D, which is that minimum qualified excesses of $10,000 for a permanent improvement and/or restoration to the home.
So staff is recommending a favorable determination that the expenses presented resulted in a permanent improvement and a restoration of a landmark property located at 805 Oliver Street.
Any questions?
Hearing none, we need a motion either to make a favorable finding of approval to deny or to continue the item.
I hear a motion.
I'll turn it on.
Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second?
Okay, we have a motion and a second. I'll throw the floor open for discussion.
This looks pretty straightforward. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this.
Looks like they did sheeting too.
Okay, so I'm having a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
All those in favor, please say -- say goodbye or raise your right hand.
That's unanimous, and there are one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight.
Okay, moving on along.
Do we need to make a note of the absolute amount?
We need to make a note of the absolute amount.
Okay, Ms. Berry, our commissioner, has left the room for a moment. Is she returning?
No, she's not returning.
No?
She's not returning.
Well, we saw the quorum.
We're used to it when we maintain a quorum, so we'll continue forward, and if she obviously returned, we'll make note of that.
I'll get the badge down.
Oh, okay.
All right, next is item E, which is COA 22-0003, hold a public meeting and consider an application for a certificate of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the development code to install a patio cover at 2234 Alamo Place within the West Oak Historic District.
The site is located on the northeast corner of Thomas Street and Alamo Place.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
So this might look familiar to some of you all who have been on the commission for, at least over the past year.
As stated, this is at 2234 Alamo Place, the owner is Richard Lempied, and the construction date is circa 1945.
So the request is for a proposed patio cover.
It would be located between the main building, the detached garage, it would be partially visible from Thomas Street, and it would be 264 square feet, which is about 12 by 22.
So you can see the property here, this is an aerial, it would be located generally in that location, and then this is looking at it from Thomas Street, and it would be right here, at the rear of the property.
So these are just some of the current conditions, this is from the southbound lane at Thomas Street, moving from the southeast looking at the property, so you'd be able to see a bit of the roof right here.
If you east, you'd be able to see a little bit of the roof there, and then northeast, you would see the property, the roof slopping downwards.
And this would be, this is the view from the northbound lane, once again moving from southeast to looking northeast, or northeast, sorry, so you'd once again be able to see a little bit of the roof, view looking east, and then the view northeast as well.
So this is the proposed elevation. As stated, this did come back in January, or this was originally presented to HLC on January 11, 2021.
It was originally presented with a metal roof, and the applicant is coming back with plywood and shingles to match the existing roof.
He's still proposing that all wood would be sitting with dark walnut.
So once again, this is kind of the view of the back rear here, and this is a proposed elevation showing the door, which is right here, the two windows that are right here and then the roof would come out this way, towards the north of the property, and be held up by three columns.
And once again, here's this aerial view. These are the three columns holding it up. This would be kind of the rooftop that's moving, and there would be, once again, that plywood and shingles to match the roof currently.
So these are the previous views that you all saw in the January 11, 2021 HLC meeting. So you do notice that their offense has been put in place at the property, and it's not as close as it was to the actual made millionth garage as it was before.
So staff's analysis use that standard standards for rehabilitation, focusing on points two, three, five, nine and 10.
And staff also looked at PVC section 4.9.60, which specifies the architectural requirements for the West Oak Area Historic District, and staff specifically focused on the architectural detail, awnings, additions, color, and roof forms.
So based off staff's analysis, staff recommends approval subject to conditions of the COA request for the installation of a patio cover, as it does meet the Secretary of Interior standards for rehabilitation, and complies with section 4.9.60 of the DDC.
Staff is recommending that the exposed wood of proposed patio cover be painted to match the exterior finish of the main structure to ensure compatibility of the addition to the main structure consistent with sections 4.9.6C3 and 4.9.6C7 of the DDC.
Any questions?
Go for it.
I think we had this question before. This is coming before the Commission because of it being seen from the road?
Correct. Because of that side street. If it were in the back, this would not come before us.
No, it would not.
Okay. Yes. Thank you.
And just to provide some insight for the new Commissioners, what was discussed in the January 11, 2021, most of the concern had a deal focused on the roof finishing.
As stated here, it was originally proposed as being metal, but this time around, he is proposing it to be shingled so it matches the current roof. It was also that dark wood stain, why staff has come back with the recommendation that the wood be painted to match the existing exterior.
Any other questions?
Okay, so normally we have four options with the COA, approve as submitted, approve as subject condition, deny or continue.
Now, from my memory, Ryan, I think you said this, the earlier application was, was it denied or approved subject condition?
It was denied.
Denied. Because it was a metal roof, basically.
Correct.
And we didn't like the staining either.
Okay, so that's before our Commission. Do we have a motion?
I move approval with conditions.
Do we have a motion? Is there a second?
I'll second.
Alright, we have a motion and a second. Alright, discussion.
I'll just open the floor, jump in.
I'm just curious why there's a problem with somebody staining it. Does it seem necessarily inappropriate from the time period?
Or is it going to take away from the value, the historical value in any way?
Do you agree that we don't want them to stain it?
No, no, I'm just curious why we're against staining, or why staff?
Well, it might not be, Ryan. I mean, that's ultimately the question.
Well, the staff recommended that they use the paint with the house instead of the...
Stain.
Yeah, personally, I don't see the value in putting that extra restriction on it.
If they want to stain it, they want to paint it the same color as the house, I'm okay with that.
I don't know if we could, you know, if everybody chose to, if we could approve it without that extra condition.
Can we go back and see the current street view from Thomas Street?
Yes.
Okay, so from the original application, what he has done is he has moved the fence out close to the street.
Okay, and he's put a gate for the driveway.
So, you can't...
You'd only see it if the gate was open.
Unless you're a really tall profile vehicle, you can't really see anything in there.
Hey, I tend to agree with Kayson on this. I don't know that stain paint is going to matter.
You're going to be able to tell that it's a patio cover?
Can we change the paint or our stain?
It can stay as the stain. The reason that staff recommended this is because if this fence was ever removed, it would not match the exterior of the home.
And I'm glad you said that because that was my next question.
I like that.
It's the fence.
Yes, the fence.
Because the fence, and that's what I wondered, because fences come and go, they get moved and things.
So is it based solely on if it's not going to match?
The fence around a construction project?
Yes, exactly. Exactly. So that makes sense.
So the thinking was the stain wouldn't match?
Correct. So staff, the reason this recommendation was...
I'm sorry, I'm trying to get...
So the reason this recommendation was made to match the exterior finish of the main structure is that if that fencing was ever removed on Thomas Street, it would not match the home.
Because there's currently no dark staining or dark paint on the home itself, it's currently white, tan.
So I'm sure it's aged a little bit over time, but it's that white, tan mixture.
If this had been a deck instead of a porch covering, would it not have been stained even?
If it was just a porch with no cover?
Yeah. I mean, I assume...
It would be an addition, so it technically would go through me as a COA approval, but it wouldn't be visible.
But once again, I would probably bring it in front of HLC, because if that was ever removed, then I would want you all to comment on it.
I guess my point to that is that we wouldn't... I assume everybody would be okay with stain on a deck, even though there's no stain anywhere else in the house.
And maybe this is just a... I mean, I take our role as not to necessarily put our style choices on other people, but to keep up with the historical integrity of it.
And I don't know that not having a stain or whatever they choose that way, unless it necessarily takes away from the historical value of it.
I think our focus should be, do they meet the rules, whether we like it or not. Okay. That's the point.
So what does the rule say about a covering? It's got to be consistent with the home and the neighborhood.
But I'm still a little bit lost about how the stain... how you could use a stain to do the same thing you can use the paint for.
It's the color.
It would be the color that makes the difference.
So there isn't a stain available?
I'm not sure if there's a white stain available that would make it match the home. I think you have to paint the wood itself.
And it's the stain just on the pillars?
Correct. So it's on all the wood framing.
So on the wood framing that's going to butt up against the house, what color is that going to be?
That's going to be dark stain.
I think from the original application, the underside, you could be able to see the fractures and whatnot. Okay. Any other discussion?
Okay. The motion and the second is to approve subject to the conditions outlined by city staff. Make sure everyone agrees that is our motion.
Okay. All those in favor, signify by raising your hand.
We have three, four, and two against.
Okay, which means...
Wait, we only have five. So can you please clarify?
Yes, ma'am.
Can you please clarify once again who the votes were in favor and who was in opposition?
I think in favor was Angie and...oh, so it was everybody but me.
No.
Oh, but you...no, I voted no as well.
Okay.
So the in favor votes were Angie and...
Lance.
Lance, or one name, and Lenny, and the opposed were Kacen and Roy.
Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it.
By the way...
Okay, but nonetheless, so that is approved subject to condition that the dark walnut color is not appropriate.
Okay. That closes the open session of the HLC agenda. So at this point, we will move into the work session part.
Our item 3A is to hold a discussion regarding the potential development of HLC partnerships with local organizations and groups.
All right. Ms. Cameron will make a presentation.
Yes. So thank you, Chair. This was something that was mentioned back in October of 2021, mentioning that HLC wanted to start kind of carrying up with local organizations and groups, doing a little bit more community outreach.
So I wanted to bring that here today so that we could have that discussion and you all can start talking about how we're going to, you know, how the commission wants to start doing that kind of community outreach, what groups you all are interested in pairing with, how we can start reaching out to them, and that kind of stuff.
And if I recall from that original discussion, the idea was A, that the HLC is fairly low profile, but that we could perhaps do more to make the community aware of which homes are, what are our historic districts, and to maybe highlight the homes.
And there are even the suggestion of the ghost story of the month contest at local elementary schools or something like that. Maybe even see if some of these homeowners would be willing to have open houses or something like that in concert with the Denton County Historic Office or parks and recreations.
And we sort of, sort of just thought it would be a good idea, but we haven't, it was also right in the middle of the start of the pandemic, so we sort of died so far.
So it's being revisited. And I think there isn't an action required on the part of the commission, but rather a discussion about where we want to instruct staff.
Do we want to go? Are we ready at this point to say, gee, let's try a few things? So having said all that, I will be quiet and just open the floor.
And I will add to that, Rory, or Chair, sorry.
It's also just wanting to, if you know, since we're having these discussions with property owners coming in, maybe not necessarily knowing about the COA process, it's also an education aspect and getting out in the community and being that voice for historic preservation because as one staff member, you know, I can only do so much, but I feel like as a commission as a whole, you all have that power and you have that authority to really get out there in community and have those discussions with property owners.
And be able to provide them with advice, be able to, because you guys are the experts. You're the experts by sitting on this commission. So that is also your role is to, you know, obviously you're volunteers, but you're there to, you know, assist the community, just as much as I am as staff.
We are here to help each other and help those who are interested in doing historic preservation, whether it's designating their property, designating historic district, you know, for the windows, for instance, you know, be able to have those conversations saying, hey, this is the Secretary of Interior's standards.
But, and it says, as we've talked about where possible materials, why don't you really look into that? What are the costs, you know, weigh the costs? What are kind of your options? So I just wanted to throw that out there as well.
This is kind of loosely related.
I see that a lot when staff members, who besides you is part of staff?
I'm staff.
I do not envy you.
Well, the question is, do we want to throw out ideas?
And it's also, I think the original contest was to challenge third graders, for us, for the staff and us to go through historic district and pick our favorite eight homes, or however many.
And then the challenge to the third grade is to write for a student or group of students to write a ghost story with about a fake main ghost story about the house they pick.
And then, then they would submit those and we would judge them and have a big thing at the school.
And in their award, their class gets whatever, and we're going to solicit donations for a $500 Halloween party if Halloween isn't outside the scope of reasonable.
That was an idea. There was also a sense of, there used to be a holiday open house that may still happen.
I don't think we've gotten away from that several years ago. And I'm not opposed to bringing third grade in or whatever education in the school I think is good.
But I really feel like we really need it for the adults. We really need it for the homeowner. I mean, don't get me wrong.
We saw why. Just, you know, giving awareness for it.
Exactly. So I really feel like, so I'm not opposed to that as an idea. Maybe in addition to, I feel like,
you know, I think maybe we even talked about possibly have a block party or something for for each historic community having a block party and maybe having us there for, you know, question and answer time where you could walk from house to house.
That type of thing.
Community party maybe not a block party.
But I do feel like the homeowners, we need the education there, for sure.
Okay, so who do we, the question would be if we're going to have that we need to get it out. How hard is it to identify? Who would you want to come to your open house block party? People in the neighbors or community wide?
We need the education for the neighborhood. And then I mean on another scale, you know, get it out for the whole city at some point, but I was going small. Y'all can figure out good stuff now.
I think the people in the historic district have, you know, the real stake in all this, and we would want to be supportive of what they would like to have. I mean, I don't want to say invite all these people over to your house.
Okay.
Wait, that's your motion.
Garden party is something in your yard.
I would, for my community, I would have like a garden party in my yard.
I have almost an acre. I'm fine with that.
For our historic neighborhood. And I think there's others if they knew it, they would offer to book off.
We can probably make sure we can get record newspaper coverage of that.
Because that isn't really hard. They'd have to send somebody.
So we want to solicit volunteers. You want to, are you actually volunteering or is that a concept?
Is there a neighborhood organization in the historical district?
Well, I mean, for me, we have the Bell Avenue district. So we don't really get together unless there's something fighting.
That's the honest truth. And we've talked about we need to, we need to get together. We've had some other neighbors move in and out to get you know ours is not real large.
Yeah. So ours is very manageable to do that. And I mean, I would volunteer for ours. But I also think as a commission, we need to go into the other ones. We have the Oak Street.
We have, you know, the others that I think we need to do the same thing in.
Can I interject just real quick? So one of the things that I did want to bring forward to all as the commission is that staff, not just myself, staff of the Denton Public Library, as well as the County Office of History and Culture, we are planning on hosting Denton's First Historic Preservation Month this May.
So this might be the perfect opportunity to host something as a block party or community party. There are going to be a series of lectures. We are trying to finalize the event calendar now.
But this is something obviously I would have liked to bring back or bring to an earlier meeting. But, you know, that's another opportunity is doing that community outreach during that month, and having events and being able to play off that because that's going to bring people from not only the county, but also hopefully
garner a lot of interest from, you know, the local community and Texas Historical Commission will be coming on May 14th to talk about local and state and federal designations.
Can you get that calendar from you? Yes, I will share that. Hopefully by Friday we'll have that.
And could we at that whatever event that you're, because you're going to be an event, right? This focus is around at the library. So it's an entire month long celebration of historic preservation. So myself and the county and the library, we are going to do a proclamation.
I would love to obviously have the commission there to support us at City Council on Tuesday, May 3rd. I don't know if that's the right day. It's either, that might be the Monday. I'm hoping that's, if anyone has their phone Tina, I don't know.
Is it Tuesday, May 3rd or 4th? Tuesday is May 3rd.
Oh, okay. So May 3rd is when the proclamation is going to be made at City Council and then in the morning will be held at the county.
So, but that's another opportunity, for instance, to have HLC really play a big part in, you know, showing up to events, getting people excited about it.
And because there will be a lot of educational opportunities there, but also maybe different ways for the community to celebrate and have your own educational.
Even being at the county would be nice if we could attend that as well.
Several months ago we had people from the Greek Eastern Orthodox Church that I think we approved an application there raising funds.
That's an, but we were well received. I think it's a good relationship. Also, Dr. Park owns a structure in the West Oak.
He also has some group homes over off of Thomas Street.
We could approach those people and say, you know what, if you're a host, we'll do an event there and we can solicit donations, but I think I have an idea for that.
If we wanted to have the first ever block party that either needs to happen in May, which I don't have a lot of time for.
If that's of interest, why don't we, if you guys think that's a good idea, why don't we chase it down?
And I think we also think we need to think about our message.
Right. And I think with people wanting to do windows and things, not against that, but to do it the proper way.
I think we need to come with an attitude of for you to enhance your property and keep it up. We're all for that.
And if it may, and I think we also have to have a very empathetic ear to when they're not energy efficient, our homes are not.
You know, and what can they do to help that? I think that's a big push for that.
I just think we have to have a message that we're open and easy to work with.
Does that make sense? Yes. Well, so we like to have a workshop on windows where we just...
I'm just using that for instance only because I didn't want to be the bad person to deny, but I was not denying to make them have to do something.
I was denying as to set a presence on this board that it's not okay to do it because nothing was going to happen.
Does that make sense if they didn't? But that was the only reason.
We may want to ask for a closed meeting with city attorneys at some point and now might not be the best time to actually get some very specific direction
about what happens when we deny and what the city would do for someone who broke the rules.
Because I didn't really want him to pull out the windows, but it would have been nice if he had to have some, not $50, but some fine that city assessed.
And they could under the "you did something without a permit" clause, but even that...
I don't want to get too far off topic where we kind of come back to our agenda item.
So let's talk, let's kind of focus on HLC partnerships and collaborations.
And if we can start formulating groups that we want to kind of reach out to, or if we don't want to, we don't have to reach out to anyone.
And we can just work on HLC, can just kind of work on what you all want to work on currently, but just to get us back on topic.
It does seem like a great opportunity to work with the county.
When you think about the county, I was here in graduate school 25 years ago, and it was dead, but now it's such a hub.
And there seems to be a good deal of traffic in that museum as well, actually.
And so I wondered, and this probably is not possible by May, but what if there was some sort of exhibit, if you will, not necessarily in the museum,
but near it within the county courthouse, because there's so much traffic through it.
What are historic homes in Denton, and how do we preserve our history?
This is an extension of this courthouse that's around you, for example, what we're trying to do.
So like I said, it's probably not timely for May, but maybe next year.
It's sort of a walkthrough where people can kind of get a general sense of opportunities.
And if you're looking for a dive, here's the resource.
You know, with that, I mentioned the block party, but now that you went there, I'm thinking,
what if we made on the courthouse square, the block party, and have all the historic communities come together,
homeowners could speak to each other, say, I did this, I did that, I've had this problem, I've had that, and kind of make it come be our guest.
In order of, you know, from you owning a historic structure, a home, whatever,
come be our guest and join with other ones, maybe, yeah.
Wouldn't it be good to hear what they want and what they expect from us, what they even know about it.
Okay, so, and I believe, and I haven't checked this out since before COVID, but in the city's budget,
we do have some small discretionary amount of money, or is that still true?
You know, if we host something, obviously, it's going to cost a little something, we can solicit donation.
So that's a question.
Just to say, I know all the commissions and boards that are underneath the planning department currently pull all from the same pot, I guess you would say.
So I'm not sure what our budget is. I don't get to see the budget numbers. I'm just told what we can and cannot afford.
So I can check that though tomorrow and put that on my to-do list and I can get back to you all.
And I also do have access to all the homeowners in the historic landmarks who own historic landmarks and are in the historic districts.
And I can give that data to you as well.
And I mean, I kind of think that Parks and Rec might want to be a part set up a tent because they're always handing out things.
You know, when they do their public service things, they have all kinds of things that they hand out at different events.
I haven't seen yet, but isn't there Twilight Tunes that starts up soon?
It's on Thursdays.
So you're going to have events like every Thursday night up there when there are other people, but I'm just OK.
So I think the answer to the question is yeah, we need to chase the can't stand down the road a little bit.
Some of an idea, ideally in May in preservation month, to have some sort of an open house or something, information.
There was a presentation that we had where there were some, I don't know what you call them, paste white boards that were on easels.
I forget.
I think once we have what's being planned during May, maybe a better idea to find one of those events and hitch on to it.
Yes. If somebody's doing something here or there, it would be like, can we have some kind of presence there?
I think it might be the best way to go about doing that instead of trying to do something from scratch and add it this far along, just trying to grab on to one of those.
OK. I like that.
That's a good point.
The timing will be an issue because we're so close to preservation month.
So when do we meet again next? April 10th, I believe.
April 11th.
But as a reminder, it's the entire month of May and there's events so far happening every weekend.
There's a cemetery tour on a Tuesday night for Oakland Cemetery that's being run by the Public Library.
So there's different events that HLC could definitely connect with and have an event as well.
OK. Are you guys comfortable?
We kind of give Cameron a free ring.
I mean, I can work with her on some donated to get her some stuff.
Let her try and put something in concert with something else in May and then we'll review sort of what that is and approve that.
OK. Next time.
Just so I get guidance real quick.
So I'm going to provide you all with the calendar, the general calendar that we have right now for historic preservation month.
I will send that tomorrow morning.
And then I need to.
So are we looking to partner with the Denton County Courthouse potentially with that office or are we looking?
OK. Sure.
OK. So we're looking to partner with them, the calendar, anything else that I'm missing.
Those are the main points that I would say is when we talk about downtown, it's always crowded and parking is a problem.
And especially in the summer.
I mean, it just teams with students if you come across where at any time you see people out walking around the square.
I think that's the beauty of it.
So we have to think in terms of would people brave that crowd that's already there and going to be there to come.
So we need a really good hook to get people to come out for something historical in that location.
Right. So maybe it could be before the Oakwood Cemetery tour, because that's not until seven that's at dusk.
So it might be something that being nice to do prior to that.
And then people could all head towards Oakwood Cemetery or I will look at the calendar and I will send it to you all.
You also could tell me how you know.
I like where you're thinking with this. I just had a thought that everything downtown is pretty historic.
Who? So retails, they may want to get in on it. And I know in the past on all kinds of car shows and everything,
they section off the square where cars aren't coming to go and people can really walk.
It meant probably not enough time this year.
But I just think that's something we ought to look and get all the people downtown, the retail, the offices, all of that, get them involved as well.
Well, the hook that you could throw out there is chop your tax bill in half, right? Because we can show you how.
You're exactly right.
We know, but a lot of people in the community don't know.
Are you talking about the storm attack exemption or are you personally showing it?
It might be a bit of an ethical thing, but I don't know.
Although I'm kidding.
Because there are a lot of people that do not know, that spend that money.
That spend $10,000 and cut your city tax bill in half for a decade.
Your property tax.
And do that every decade and you could save.
When you present it to us, save some of the tax. Don't give us a $50,000 bill. Give us a $15,000. Save the money.
Yeah, next shop for the 10 years down the road.
Okay, so that's our hook. That could be our hook.
There you go.
And you'll get people who will show up for that hook. I'm telling you.
There you go.
There you go, Lenny.
Okay, fine. Moving on to item B, which are changes that are being proposed with HLC.
I think you guys have seen this.
The theory is, as I understand it, that by going from nine to seven on our commission,
which means we get to go from five to four for a quorum, making it perhaps incrementally a little easier to conduct a meeting.
But the guidelines are that they really want majority, in this case four of seven, to be commissioners for the community of large with inside districts or whatever.
Well, there's just only so many seats, and you have the attorney and the architect and all things that are probably more relevant, because how many times have people come to me with a federal tax question, which is my expertise?
Well, never. And generally, I think it's probably a good idea.
There was nothing in their changes that gave me heartburn, and I'll throw the floor open.
We did realize we had a math error, so it'll actually be in the number five persons that will satisfy any of the criteria from the certified local government programs.
I think the draft of your ordinance had four, so we didn't have to make that correction, because 60% was 4.2, I believe is what it came out to.
But really, the whole objective one is possibly assist with achieving quorum a little easier, but two, more importantly, making sure our program and the criteria that are affiliated with persons that are appointed to the commission is consistent with our certified local government program.
And so, and I know with the ordinance, it lists out the different areas of expertise that folks can fill, so we're trying to make sure that our criteria are aligned with the CLG.
I know council had made also some adjustments here recently regarding removing some requirements for boards and commissions, but we were interested in making sure that we protect the HLC from the perspective of we know that we have minimum criteria that have to be addressed to maintain our CLG program status, so we wanted to make sure that we did not compromise that.
And with us having two vacant seats right now, we felt like this was a good time to make those adjustments, and then also the ordinance proposes providing for holdover for districts.
I just know it as Roy and Mary. So I think it's districts three and four.
Anyway, and then also looking at balancing out the makeup of the commission in terms of which appointees would, where their terms would expire in an even year versus an odd year. So trying to take some opportunities of balancing that better to allow for hopefully some longevity on the commission, but experience, because we recognize that we'll have new folks that are appointed as well.
And then the one thing I was just going to add is also in the ordinance, we made a change for so you'll see the list of qualifications, and we change that and to or so that someone does not have to have those eight qualifications all together.
So that change has been made as well and that's going to be presented in front of city council tomorrow.
We wanted to make sure you're aware of the changes and wanted to be proactive and transparent so that you knew what was being considered as it relates to the HLC instead of learning after the fact.
Any questions? I mean, it's not the biggest deal with this is filling out those seats right I guess there's been struggles with that.
Are there any fish on the hook as far as people want to be on it at all or showing any interest.
So currently, if we if this were to pass tomorrow, we do have seven commissioners.
Okay, I just want to make sure there wasn't somebody that actually was interested in it, that no longer going to have a opportunity.
No, understood. I believe, I believe Council did nominate two possible persons for consideration from the Denton County Historical Commission.
So, but otherwise, in Council still has the ability to remove somebody off the commission and point them like for example if they did not concur with our recommendation to hold over Districts three and four and wanted to go ahead and turn Roy and Mary they have the ability to be able to do so and could appoint folks there.
And staffs recommendation was that not occur. So that way we can have the longevity because that's our vice chair and the chair, right. So, but we serve at the at the will of Council, since they they appoint all the members to the boards and commission so that was our recommendation behind that but
technically there are two folks that have names have presented from a nomination standpoint but but to our knowledge no action has been taken on that yet.
Okay.
I point this out, but it is been an honor to serve right as long as I've been around.
And I've enjoyed it.
Somewhere along the way we need to be looking at electing new officers and things like that so that you start to get some experience, because when you're the chairperson what you need is someone sitting out there on your commission tossing you softballs, which Lenny did several tonight,
because without emotion you just are dead in the water, doesn't mean you want to pass them but you want to get to the discussion.
So, somewhere, when's our next election.
We had one, I can't remember when but with COVID messed everything up, we had an election in the fall. So if somebody has a burning desire to switch seats.
You just let me know.
Do whatever.
Next is HLC 22 dash oh three zero is a discussion of our landmark mission project.
So this is just once again, as we had that request back in October, discussing potential HLC partnerships and collaborations.
It was noted as being discussed today, but this is really all for those who are native to the commission. This is something that we use to for staff guidance to work towards the future.
We had a request from HLC, for instance, as you can see the definitions ad hoc committee, there was a little bit of discussion earlier. And, you know, having those kind of requests for staff as well as to keep HLC moving towards their own goals.
Can we discuss what we'd like to add? Yes.
I would make Roy's suggestion, is it possible for us to meet with city attorneys on certain topics?
It absolutely is. We just request they be here and ask for a closed session.
That's all we have to do.
I think it's to that point, though, keep in mind, though, we are limited and Hillary, feel free to chime in. We are limited in terms of what topics can be discussed in a closed session.
So in the spirit of not also not violating the Texas Open Meetings Act, but if there are certain items that the commission is wanting to have a discussion on those, then it would be helpful if you let us know what those are so we can be prepared to have those discussions.
But just know that we are limited by the Texas Open Meetings Act about what items we can enter into closed session.
Great. So my suggestion, since I'm just back up, would be to give questions to Cameron. Cameron can group them to city attorney's office. We can perform necessary research and then Marcella and/or Matt, our city attorney, can weigh in on the appropriateness of a closed session.
Or perhaps we can just push out a responsive written report.
Or our ad hoc committee, which has three or fewer members, can meet with city attorneys without violating the Open Meetings Act, if I'm not mistaken.
So what we could do is we could charge our ad hoc committee with questions that we propose to them, but we do that in an open meeting, then they can meet and report back.
So we do need to fill those two positions. They were held by two prior commissioners who are no longer here. So we do need a vote of at least, or we need to have at least three people sitting on that commission.
What is the goal? It is to develop definitions. Ad hoc committee to consider... Define the tax qualification to what is considered... The definition of the type of expenditure you qualify for. Yes.
Like, not handrails or not splash cards, not paper towel wraps, right? I'm sorry. So defining what is an improvement and/or rehabilitation to a property.
And what's the difference between the two? When you start looking at this... It's kind of hard to find.
But I really think that has to be firm and in writing as guidance to the people. We're very open to all kinds of possible lawsuits and things like that.
It's not clearly defined so that you can make the expectations known to the person and not just have them do something and get denied.
What is the mechanism that that would happen in? So the board would ask that committee to go to meet with city attorneys, right? Would that be a...
For the definition, we would ask them to develop that and present it back here to the HLC. Then we would approve it and ask the city staff, the city council, to include that in the staff in the city ordinances.
Okay, so they would be incorporated into the rules regarding certified historic expenditures, add to the statute. Sorry, it's late at night.
Which is different than the ad hoc committee to do the other stuff would be the question about, you know, what happens when we deny?
That's a Q&A thing there, which we can do in an open session, right? There's nothing off limits in an open session, but it has to be put on an agenda, published 72 hours in advance, barring some exigent circumstance.
Well, do we want to do that? Do we want... I mean, I guess the bigger question, if we want something on the agenda, how do we go about doing that?
You come to me. Okay. So all we got to do is let her know, put something on the agenda next time, and we can just have an open Q&A with city attorneys, because we're not trying to hide anything.
We're asking, hey, if this happens, what will be the result? There's still, I mean... So would you like to...
Well, I don't want to put them on the spot as far as, you know, okay, what's going to happen? There's going to be a whole lot of I don't know's most likely. I think...
And I'll have to look into that.
Yeah, exactly. It may be a better situation where we could submit questions.
I would agree with that.
Oh, my, yes. Questions in advance will be more productive for...
That's kind of what I had in mind. Questions in advance. So with the example tonight, when I said what happens, to me, that wasn't an ideal situation to ask with an applicant there.
And I know that we have some of those because of where I was going with it. Is that appropriate? It's that kind of question that I'll specifically, that I would ask.
Let us add to the matrix and meeting with the attorney regarding topics to be submitted to Cameron in advance. We can board-smith that a little bit better.
But because the other thing is that we do have to post the topic on the agenda. So that way we can take care of that.
So I think what we need is to refill the ad hoc committee on the definition of qualified expenditure. Do we have any volunteers? I think Angie is on there. Would you guys like to volunteer?
Do you still consider it a committee? I don't have anybody. Just three. Three other people.
You guys have got a limited number of people or three is the most you can do without. Because if you have a committee that has more than three, violate the Open Meetings Act.
Well, so and speaking of Open Meetings Act, so the purpose of the matrix is to just request for certain items to be added to the matrix for future posting and discussion.
So we're starting to veer off track. If we want to have a discussion regarding who's interested in serving on the ad hoc committee, let us put that on our next agenda so we can have that discussion.
But the whole purpose of the matrix item is to identify items that the commission would like to be brought back to a future meeting day to have further discussion about because we're not posted for discussion on the topics on the matrix.
We're just asking from you, what would you like us to add to that? So that's what this item is, is to discuss future things further agenda.
What would you like to have added to this? So what I've heard, my apologies for having to step out, but what I've heard is opportunity to meet with city attorney regarding variety of topics to be emailed to Cameron.
Another one is to discuss the ad hoc committee or reappointing members to the ad hoc committee. And I think we've already got on our matrix definitions ad hoc committee.
So we'll just circle back on that. But are there any other items that the commission would like to have added to this list that are already not on there for countering a future date for discussion?
Well, couldn't we submit questions at this point to the city attorney? No, whatever questions we have submitted through Cameron. Yeah, that's what I mean.
Okay, I thought we needed to have that in the matrix. No, we'll just do a general item on the matrix, but any specific questions that the commissioners have.
And what we can do is we can also post this on our next agenda about what topics we are interested in learning more from the city attorney about and can also have that discussion at that point in time.
So, and then that can pair down the list if we want to determine there's some consensus amongst the group as to what that list of questions might be.
You know, we can do that and post that on on our next agenda as well. And that might be better to help get the commission a better focus.
And just like when up there, the secretary of whoever it was, the point about something is preferred or they may do, and we need to understand, can we enforce whatever we think on that?
You know, if we think it says they may use the vinyl or may use wood if we want to specify one of the other and say they have to do this. Yes, that style of issues is definitely appropriate to flag for the city attorney review.
Yeah, yeah, it's for the guidance would be appropriate.
And I assume that when we submit these questions camera that needs to be done in the city doesn't account correct.
Yes, correct.
Okay, I believe that concludes our agenda for tonight.
We have no other item, we stand adjourned.