1 00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:04,560 So we're going to call to order for students. 2 00:00:04,560 --> 00:00:10,040 All right, welcome, everyone, to our Historic Landmark Commission meeting. 3 00:00:10,040 --> 00:00:14,920 Today is November 14th, Monday, and the time is 530. 4 00:00:14,920 --> 00:00:15,920 Welcome, everyone. 5 00:00:15,920 --> 00:00:17,720 Thank you all for coming. 6 00:00:17,720 --> 00:00:21,560 And if we would stand up and do the punch. 7 00:00:21,560 --> 00:00:29,360 I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for 8 00:00:29,360 --> 00:00:38,720 which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 9 00:00:38,720 --> 00:00:40,440 Honor the Texas flag. 10 00:00:40,440 --> 00:00:53,760 I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible. 11 00:00:53,760 --> 00:00:56,040 So we have a fairly busy meeting tonight. 12 00:00:56,040 --> 00:01:01,120 We will start out with our public meeting. 13 00:01:01,120 --> 00:01:06,400 And so I think our first item is to consider the minutes from November 12th, which I've 14 00:01:06,400 --> 00:01:07,960 just put away. 15 00:01:07,960 --> 00:01:15,320 Has anybody got any corrections or comments to add? 16 00:01:15,320 --> 00:01:22,800 Minutes from, sorry, not November 12th, November 2nd. 17 00:01:22,800 --> 00:01:27,560 Anybody have any updates for it? 18 00:01:27,560 --> 00:01:28,560 Thank you. 19 00:01:28,560 --> 00:01:29,560 Anybody want a second? 20 00:01:29,560 --> 00:01:30,560 Second. 21 00:01:30,560 --> 00:01:33,360 All those in favor, aye. 22 00:01:33,360 --> 00:01:34,360 Anybody opposed? 23 00:01:34,360 --> 00:01:35,960 I stand approved. 24 00:01:35,960 --> 00:01:46,120 All right, so now we're going to take up COA 22-0014, we're going to hold a public 25 00:01:46,120 --> 00:01:51,360 meeting and consider an application for a certificate of appropriateness in accordance 26 00:01:51,360 --> 00:01:58,040 with Section 2.9.2 of the Denton Development Code to install solar panels on the roof of 27 00:01:58,040 --> 00:02:05,200 an existing residence at 2101 West Oak Street within the West Oak Area Historic District. 28 00:02:05,200 --> 00:02:10,920 This site is located on the southwest corner of West Oak Street and abouts. 29 00:02:10,920 --> 00:02:14,440 And Cameron will give us a rundown. 30 00:02:14,440 --> 00:02:17,540 Thank you, Chair. 31 00:02:17,540 --> 00:02:22,160 So the address is 2101 West Oak Street as mentioned, it's on the southwest corner of 32 00:02:22,160 --> 00:02:24,480 West Oak Street and Fouts Street. 33 00:02:24,480 --> 00:02:28,640 The owners are Marybeth Butler and Kenneth Pritchett. 34 00:02:28,640 --> 00:02:34,800 Its construction date is circa 1923, but it did have a second story addition added circa 35 00:02:34,800 --> 00:02:35,800 1937. 36 00:02:35,800 --> 00:02:40,960 So just a little bit of the building's history, it was constructed for a fair in Fouts. 37 00:02:40,960 --> 00:02:43,120 Its architectural style is a bungalow style. 38 00:02:43,120 --> 00:02:48,360 Some of its defining features are that square massing, the overhanging closed eaves as you 39 00:02:48,360 --> 00:02:55,680 can see here, that curved portico supported by decorative brackets. 40 00:02:55,680 --> 00:03:01,680 So as stated, the request is for the installation of 23 solar panels on the roof as you can 41 00:03:01,680 --> 00:03:02,680 see here. 42 00:03:02,680 --> 00:03:08,000 So you do see the house located here, a front view of the house from West Oak Street and 43 00:03:08,000 --> 00:03:09,940 then that site plan. 44 00:03:09,940 --> 00:03:15,040 It would be located both on the first and second story roofs. 45 00:03:15,040 --> 00:03:17,880 So this is the current conditions of the property. 46 00:03:17,880 --> 00:03:22,360 This is looking southwest from West Oak Street in front of the property and you can kind 47 00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:27,680 of highlight it here at the proposed solar panel locations. 48 00:03:27,680 --> 00:03:31,880 This is the current conditions looking southeast from West Oak Street. 49 00:03:31,880 --> 00:03:35,920 And once again, the proposed solar panel locations here on the first story roof and then the 50 00:03:35,920 --> 00:03:39,580 second story roof in the rear. 51 00:03:39,580 --> 00:03:45,400 And then the current condition is looking west from Fouts Street. 52 00:03:45,400 --> 00:03:49,840 So looking at the architectural drawings, this is looking west. 53 00:03:49,840 --> 00:03:52,680 This is facing east and then this is facing south. 54 00:03:52,680 --> 00:03:58,800 So on the west side, we're looking at eight solar panels on that first story, we're looking 55 00:03:58,800 --> 00:04:03,560 at two solar panels on that rear second story towards the rear of the property. 56 00:04:03,560 --> 00:04:09,560 Then there is proposed to be six solar panels on that south facing roof on the second story 57 00:04:09,560 --> 00:04:10,560 as well. 58 00:04:10,560 --> 00:04:18,800 An additional two solar panels on that east side facing Fouts Street and then five solar 59 00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:23,040 panels on that first story facing Fouts Street as well. 60 00:04:23,040 --> 00:04:29,600 This is a solar panel elevation, so it can be about 10 inches max off the roof. 61 00:04:29,600 --> 00:04:35,240 So this shows the roof line right here with those shingles and then it would have a support 62 00:04:35,240 --> 00:04:42,240 structure here with the solar panel located about approximately 10 inches off of the roof. 63 00:04:42,240 --> 00:04:46,840 Additionally, this is the proposed system layout just showing where the utility meters 64 00:04:46,840 --> 00:04:49,920 and some of the electrical wiring would be located. 65 00:04:49,920 --> 00:04:56,720 It would be located on that western facade, but it would be located behind Davey Sistine 66 00:04:56,720 --> 00:04:57,720 Properties Gate. 67 00:04:57,720 --> 00:05:02,200 So you wouldn't be able to see it from the street. 68 00:05:02,200 --> 00:05:04,680 So this is just delving into solar panel detailings. 69 00:05:04,680 --> 00:05:06,240 I'm not going to go into high level. 70 00:05:06,240 --> 00:05:09,600 I'm going to keep it really high level for you all, but this would be the solar panel 71 00:05:09,600 --> 00:05:15,200 itself and then just some of the support systems that will support the solar panels to the 72 00:05:15,200 --> 00:05:16,200 roof. 73 00:05:16,200 --> 00:05:20,600 So we do have that cross rail, which is located here by number two. 74 00:05:20,600 --> 00:05:25,720 So that's this system right here and then we also have this system, support system as 75 00:05:25,720 --> 00:05:33,640 well, which goes to this cross rail and which is highlighted by number three. 76 00:05:33,640 --> 00:05:39,240 And then this is just a breakdown of the actual solar panel system, which would be basically 77 00:05:39,240 --> 00:05:43,760 what runs the solar panels and we'll see only a little bit of that on the exterior as I 78 00:05:43,760 --> 00:05:47,240 stated, but once again, it would be behind the gate, but I just wanted to show you some 79 00:05:47,240 --> 00:05:50,480 of that detailing. 80 00:05:50,480 --> 00:05:55,840 So staff's analysis as part of the packet, it did look at the standards for rehabilitation, 81 00:05:55,840 --> 00:06:03,960 specifically looking at numbers nine and 10 in regards to exterior alterations. 82 00:06:03,960 --> 00:06:10,800 Additionally, staff did look at section 4.9.6C, which is in regards to the West Oak Area 83 00:06:10,800 --> 00:06:12,600 Historic District. 84 00:06:12,600 --> 00:06:18,000 And one of the relevant architectural requirements that applied to this specific project was 85 00:06:18,000 --> 00:06:21,780 the roof forms, specifically looking at skylights and solar panels. 86 00:06:21,780 --> 00:06:26,160 So as part of that, the Historic Landmark Commission may allow skylights and solar panels 87 00:06:26,160 --> 00:06:30,320 on a building if their placement does not have an adverse effect on the architecture 88 00:06:30,320 --> 00:06:34,400 of a building or the district as a whole. 89 00:06:34,400 --> 00:06:42,080 So staff is recommending an approval of the COA request to install solar panels at 2101 90 00:06:42,080 --> 00:06:47,640 West Oak Street as the proposed project meets the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation 91 00:06:47,640 --> 00:06:51,900 and section 4.9.6C of the Debt and Development Code. 92 00:06:51,900 --> 00:06:55,200 However, staff is doing this subject to conditions. 93 00:06:55,200 --> 00:06:59,920 Staff is recommending that six proposed solar panels not being solved on the first story 94 00:06:59,920 --> 00:07:01,200 roof. 95 00:07:01,200 --> 00:07:05,520 This would include the five solar panels proposed for the east side of the roof and the northernmost 96 00:07:05,520 --> 00:07:07,280 panel proposed for the west side of the roof. 97 00:07:07,280 --> 00:07:10,080 So I'm just going to skip ahead real quick. 98 00:07:10,080 --> 00:07:11,080 It would be these ones. 99 00:07:11,080 --> 00:07:15,720 So it would be this solar panel that staff is recommending to not be implemented, nor 100 00:07:15,720 --> 00:07:21,600 these on the east side due to the fact that it's on a corner lot. 101 00:07:21,600 --> 00:07:27,320 Additionally, prior to any issuance of any building permits, a report would be provided 102 00:07:27,320 --> 00:07:32,040 to the city to confirm that the solar panels are removed in the future, that the essential 103 00:07:32,040 --> 00:07:36,280 form and integrity of the historic property is unimpaired, according to the Secretary 104 00:07:36,280 --> 00:07:40,280 of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. 105 00:07:40,280 --> 00:07:50,160 So any questions? 106 00:07:50,160 --> 00:07:58,640 So the specific picture right here is showing this silver in terms of the actual details 107 00:07:58,640 --> 00:07:59,640 that were provided. 108 00:07:59,640 --> 00:08:04,760 It did state that it would be a darker aluminum, and I don't know what is necessarily meant 109 00:08:04,760 --> 00:08:08,640 by darker, but I'm assuming closer to something like this, so it blends as one. 110 00:08:08,640 --> 00:08:10,560 But the applicant is here. 111 00:08:10,560 --> 00:08:14,720 Mary Beth Butler is here to answer any questions that you all have specifically about this 112 00:08:14,720 --> 00:08:15,720 project. 113 00:08:15,720 --> 00:08:17,960 And the roof color is a green, I thought. 114 00:08:17,960 --> 00:08:20,120 It is a darker gray. 115 00:08:20,120 --> 00:08:21,120 Oh, yes. 116 00:08:21,120 --> 00:08:22,120 Oh, a green. 117 00:08:22,120 --> 00:08:23,120 Thank you. 118 00:08:23,120 --> 00:08:24,120 Yes. 119 00:08:24,120 --> 00:08:25,120 I have a question. 120 00:08:25,120 --> 00:08:26,120 Why so many? 121 00:08:26,120 --> 00:08:31,120 Because typically, we don't see that many on it. 122 00:08:31,120 --> 00:08:34,640 I don't know the whole size of the house, but is there a reason why there's so many? 123 00:08:34,640 --> 00:08:39,640 I am not sure, I would have to hear that question towards the applicant, if they're willing 124 00:08:39,640 --> 00:08:40,640 to answer. 125 00:08:40,640 --> 00:08:41,640 I'm sorry that I'm not able to really answer it. 126 00:08:41,640 --> 00:08:42,640 I know the solar company recommended it for us, so it looks like we're not going to get 127 00:08:42,640 --> 00:08:43,640 what was actually recommended based on the recommendation for the conditions. 128 00:08:43,640 --> 00:08:58,160 So I'm sorry I'm not a solar expert. 129 00:08:58,160 --> 00:09:05,840 That's actually not so many, when you look at houses in our neighborhood, they have more. 130 00:09:05,840 --> 00:09:06,840 Really? 131 00:09:06,840 --> 00:09:07,840 How big are those panels, by the way? 132 00:09:07,840 --> 00:09:08,840 Yeah, and it might have to do with size. 133 00:09:08,840 --> 00:09:09,840 I think it may have to be the size is rather large. 134 00:09:09,840 --> 00:09:10,840 Because I think they're getting bigger now, they've gotten better at the chemistry of 135 00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:11,840 making panels. 136 00:09:11,840 --> 00:09:12,840 I was just going to say, I would have to look at the specific details in the packet. 137 00:09:12,840 --> 00:09:13,840 I didn't include that on here. 138 00:09:13,840 --> 00:09:14,840 Yeah, it just... 139 00:09:14,840 --> 00:09:31,400 But I think they are, because if this is three feet right here, we're looking probably at 140 00:09:31,400 --> 00:09:45,320 six feet each, six feet by probably four feet. 141 00:09:45,320 --> 00:09:49,920 How beneficial is it going to be in the summer when the tree, the leaf canopy is out? 142 00:09:49,920 --> 00:09:54,440 I'm concerned about the health of the trees, if you know what I mean, in the long term, 143 00:09:54,440 --> 00:09:58,240 somebody may buy it after you and just go whack, whack, we need our trees because we 144 00:09:58,240 --> 00:10:00,240 know the tree where this is not enforced. 145 00:10:00,240 --> 00:10:03,560 If I may, we bought that house because of the trees. 146 00:10:03,560 --> 00:10:06,920 No, I know, not you, but after you, it means somebody will... 147 00:10:06,920 --> 00:10:07,920 Our houses outlive us. 148 00:10:07,920 --> 00:10:08,920 We only care to take them. 149 00:10:08,920 --> 00:10:09,920 We only rent them. 150 00:10:09,920 --> 00:10:14,440 We don't actually own them, and it costs a lot to rent them. 151 00:10:14,440 --> 00:10:21,080 Yeah, because the picture you should is so many trees, I just can't see that this is 152 00:10:21,080 --> 00:10:22,080 very beneficial. 153 00:10:22,080 --> 00:10:27,080 We have consulted with two tree sergeants and we have a plan for the trimming that would 154 00:10:27,080 --> 00:10:28,080 need to be done. 155 00:10:28,080 --> 00:10:36,020 It would not be harmful to the trees. 156 00:10:36,020 --> 00:10:40,840 So the six that are going to be removed, there was one, or the six that are recommended to 157 00:10:40,840 --> 00:10:42,840 be not included in the approval? 158 00:10:42,840 --> 00:10:43,840 Yes. 159 00:10:43,840 --> 00:10:48,080 The one in the top left, what is the purpose for that one not being there? 160 00:10:48,080 --> 00:10:51,520 That is to just reduce the visibility from West Oak. 161 00:10:51,520 --> 00:10:57,000 So in my packet, and staff included, the fact that, yes, you would be see it from the pedestrian 162 00:10:57,000 --> 00:11:04,200 level, but due to the vehicular traffic going from East to West, and also it facing a shared 163 00:11:04,200 --> 00:11:10,760 drive as well as a neighboring property, and the fact that this is less than a foot from 164 00:11:10,760 --> 00:11:19,720 the front, it would be highly visible, and so this was to just reduce that visibility. 165 00:11:19,720 --> 00:11:24,080 So this is zoomed in a little bit, so it's close to that roof edge right here. 166 00:11:24,080 --> 00:11:30,200 It would reduce it a little bit further in, about four or five feet in. 167 00:11:30,200 --> 00:11:36,480 So just if someone's looking straight on at the property, you wouldn't be able to see 168 00:11:36,480 --> 00:11:41,840 it as well, because it is, like I said, a maximum of about 10 inches off. 169 00:11:41,840 --> 00:11:45,120 So they are going to be parallel to the roof. 170 00:11:45,120 --> 00:11:48,000 That's the picture that worries me of the trees. 171 00:11:48,000 --> 00:11:49,000 I love trees. 172 00:11:49,000 --> 00:11:55,560 Well, you know, I have lots of trees on my lot, and it's so many trees, in fact, that 173 00:11:55,560 --> 00:11:58,600 solar is not possible without cutting down some of the trees. 174 00:11:58,600 --> 00:12:02,160 He said, "Well, we'd have somebody come in and pick out the trees." 175 00:12:02,160 --> 00:12:03,160 No, no. 176 00:12:03,160 --> 00:12:05,360 Yeah, I mean, my trees keep my house full. 177 00:12:05,360 --> 00:12:11,000 I don't know the answer to a question about whether or not it's, we'll see. 178 00:12:11,000 --> 00:12:14,840 We have spoken to Frenchies, and we have spoken to tree shepherds, and we have a plan in place 179 00:12:14,840 --> 00:12:19,200 to work with tree shepherds to do the trimming that's needed to make those trees, to make 180 00:12:19,200 --> 00:12:22,200 those solar panels allow to be effective. 181 00:12:22,200 --> 00:12:26,000 And without the five, or is it six? 182 00:12:26,000 --> 00:12:32,840 It would be five over here, and then it would be the reduction of one over here, but it 183 00:12:32,840 --> 00:12:33,840 would leave seven. 184 00:12:33,840 --> 00:12:35,840 Without those six, does it still work? 185 00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:36,840 I don't know. 186 00:12:36,840 --> 00:12:37,840 It may not. 187 00:12:37,840 --> 00:12:38,840 It may very well not. 188 00:12:38,840 --> 00:12:42,840 And I would find out that my neighbors across the street in the new house have solar panels 189 00:12:42,840 --> 00:12:47,240 across the expanse of their porch roof that faces the street on the south side. 190 00:12:47,240 --> 00:12:49,840 So if visibility is an issue, I'm not sure. 191 00:12:49,840 --> 00:12:52,360 Yeah, that was a discussion before. 192 00:12:52,360 --> 00:12:55,880 When did that come forward? 193 00:12:55,880 --> 00:12:59,360 It was just before you came. 194 00:12:59,360 --> 00:13:00,360 Okay. 195 00:13:00,360 --> 00:13:01,360 Yeah. 196 00:13:01,360 --> 00:13:08,960 So my understanding is that there's, it sounds like it's not a difference in the neighborhood 197 00:13:08,960 --> 00:13:12,160 if there's other houses like that that have it. 198 00:13:12,160 --> 00:13:13,160 I guess. 199 00:13:13,160 --> 00:13:14,160 Is it really going to change? 200 00:13:14,160 --> 00:13:15,160 It wasn't a historic house, though. 201 00:13:15,160 --> 00:13:19,560 The house was a new house. 202 00:13:19,560 --> 00:13:22,240 So that does matter somewhat if it's not a new house. 203 00:13:22,240 --> 00:13:26,840 Is this going to be any kind of detriment to the, I mean, if any, I don't think that'll 204 00:13:26,840 --> 00:13:30,960 help protect the roof and that sort of thing. 205 00:13:30,960 --> 00:13:33,960 I guess I just don't see the issue with it. 206 00:13:33,960 --> 00:13:35,320 Is it just purely aesthetic? 207 00:13:35,320 --> 00:13:37,880 Which side is east and west? 208 00:13:37,880 --> 00:13:38,880 Yes. 209 00:13:38,880 --> 00:13:46,360 So this is facing north, this is facing west, this is facing east, this is south, and it 210 00:13:46,360 --> 00:13:47,360 is a corner lot. 211 00:13:47,360 --> 00:13:51,880 So this is West Oak right here, and then this is Valdez Street. 212 00:13:51,880 --> 00:13:57,040 So that is why staff's argument is due to the fact that it's on a corner lot, and there 213 00:13:57,040 --> 00:13:58,680 will have to be some trimming of trees. 214 00:13:58,680 --> 00:14:03,160 There will be a higher visibility of seeing these versus these western edge ones. 215 00:14:03,160 --> 00:14:09,000 Would you mind putting up the ordinance again that shows us how we're supposed to deal with? 216 00:14:09,000 --> 00:14:10,000 Okay. 217 00:14:10,000 --> 00:14:15,600 Are you asking for staff's recommendation or for- 218 00:14:15,600 --> 00:14:16,600 That. 219 00:14:16,600 --> 00:14:17,600 Yeah. 220 00:14:17,600 --> 00:14:25,340 Thank you. 221 00:14:25,340 --> 00:14:27,600 So what is the adverse effect? 222 00:14:27,600 --> 00:14:29,600 Is it building? 223 00:14:29,600 --> 00:14:34,140 If it is close to the color of the roof. 224 00:14:34,140 --> 00:14:35,140 We don't know that. 225 00:14:35,140 --> 00:14:38,220 We just saw a picture. 226 00:14:38,220 --> 00:14:40,360 Let's assume that it is. 227 00:14:40,360 --> 00:14:41,360 What is the adverse effect? 228 00:14:41,360 --> 00:14:42,360 Yeah. 229 00:14:42,360 --> 00:14:48,680 I mean, I've driven down Locust, and it's only a few blocks from here, and there was 230 00:14:48,680 --> 00:14:56,000 one that faces the street, and it's quite visible and not at all in style with the architecture. 231 00:14:56,000 --> 00:15:00,120 It doesn't look the same at all. 232 00:15:00,120 --> 00:15:02,040 So it's not changing the building in any way. 233 00:15:02,040 --> 00:15:04,120 But that's not what they said. 234 00:15:04,120 --> 00:15:05,120 It's the overall architecture. 235 00:15:05,120 --> 00:15:10,400 I mean, I have less of a concern about that one panel at the very edge, but the others 236 00:15:10,400 --> 00:15:15,980 I absolutely positively can see. 237 00:15:15,980 --> 00:15:18,920 I guess we don't define that adverse effect in that ordinance, do we? 238 00:15:18,920 --> 00:15:19,920 No. 239 00:15:19,920 --> 00:15:20,920 It's the subjective. 240 00:15:20,920 --> 00:15:21,920 That's what we're here for. 241 00:15:21,920 --> 00:15:22,920 Yeah. 242 00:15:22,920 --> 00:15:26,080 I think that's a good point, too, because I live in an older home, and anything that 243 00:15:26,080 --> 00:15:32,280 we can do to help with energy efficiency, because if we stay where we don't change windows, 244 00:15:32,280 --> 00:15:34,280 we don't have energy efficiency there. 245 00:15:34,280 --> 00:15:39,640 So it's like, what can we do to help if it does? 246 00:15:39,640 --> 00:15:43,160 So I look at it that way, too. 247 00:15:43,160 --> 00:15:49,760 What is the adverse effect, or is it more of a better effect that they have that energy 248 00:15:49,760 --> 00:15:50,760 source coming in now? 249 00:15:50,760 --> 00:15:53,600 I think they're investing in the property in general, and not keeping it. 250 00:15:53,600 --> 00:15:54,600 Right. 251 00:15:54,600 --> 00:15:58,880 Well, I mean, I've been through, I guess this is the third one of these I've been through. 252 00:15:58,880 --> 00:16:01,400 I don't know, Angie, have you been through the other two? 253 00:16:01,400 --> 00:16:04,200 Oh, I've been through-- before you, Mary. 254 00:16:04,200 --> 00:16:05,200 Really? 255 00:16:05,200 --> 00:16:06,200 Okay. 256 00:16:06,200 --> 00:16:07,200 Okay. 257 00:16:07,200 --> 00:16:10,200 I thought I was the oldest person here before. 258 00:16:10,200 --> 00:16:11,200 No. 259 00:16:11,200 --> 00:16:12,200 Yeah, I don't know. 260 00:16:12,200 --> 00:16:13,440 The visibility is kind of an issue. 261 00:16:13,440 --> 00:16:16,720 If you've driven down locusts, try to cross from Soho Salon. 262 00:16:16,720 --> 00:16:22,140 That is in great detriment to what it looks like. 263 00:16:22,140 --> 00:16:24,960 The whole character of the neighborhood changes when you see those solar panels. 264 00:16:24,960 --> 00:16:31,320 And I'm all for saving money, by the way, because I live on West Oak Street. 265 00:16:31,320 --> 00:16:33,320 And I don't mind the one panel that's there. 266 00:16:33,320 --> 00:16:36,160 The others I really do agree with. 267 00:16:36,160 --> 00:16:43,280 I might want to have an addition to the considerations that we don't harm the trees taking any out, 268 00:16:43,280 --> 00:16:47,360 because that's my fear, is what Lenny said is that they would decide that we should take 269 00:16:47,360 --> 00:16:48,360 them out. 270 00:16:48,360 --> 00:16:49,360 I guess it's quite negative. 271 00:16:49,360 --> 00:16:53,120 Do we have an authority to dictate what happens to trees? 272 00:16:53,120 --> 00:16:58,320 It would change the architectural style, it would change the neighborhood. 273 00:16:58,320 --> 00:17:03,440 And that is a bit of a concern, because trees seem to vanish on Friday nights at 5 o'clock 274 00:17:03,440 --> 00:17:04,440 around Denton. 275 00:17:04,440 --> 00:17:05,440 I'm just saying. 276 00:17:05,440 --> 00:17:06,440 Well, there's no indication. 277 00:17:06,440 --> 00:17:15,100 I mean, who knows what a future owner of the property would do, but there's no indication 278 00:17:15,100 --> 00:17:20,480 that the present owner would be removing trees. 279 00:17:20,480 --> 00:17:25,560 Well, and we, for the record, we do have our Tina Bergens, deputy director of the services, 280 00:17:25,560 --> 00:17:27,040 we do have a tree preservation ordinance. 281 00:17:27,040 --> 00:17:30,920 And so we have requirements in place with respect to removal of trees. 282 00:17:30,920 --> 00:17:37,320 So property owners do have some rights under our tree preservation ordinance for being 283 00:17:37,320 --> 00:17:43,240 able to remove trees, if it's so allowed under the ordinance, but also they have the ability 284 00:17:43,240 --> 00:17:45,560 to provide for maintenance of the trees as well. 285 00:17:45,560 --> 00:17:51,920 So we would work with the property owner that regardless this applicant or any other applicant 286 00:17:51,920 --> 00:17:56,280 or property owner in the community to make sure that if any tree removal is done so it's 287 00:17:56,280 --> 00:17:59,440 in accordance with our tree preservation ordinance that the city council has established. 288 00:17:59,440 --> 00:18:03,320 Well, that's true, except at 5 o'clock suddenly the tree hackers come out and whack away. 289 00:18:03,320 --> 00:18:07,080 I'm just saying that I live across the street from someone I, you know, there's no, there's 290 00:18:07,080 --> 00:18:10,480 nobody to protect that tree at 5 o'clock on a Friday, I can assure you, and I'm not talking 291 00:18:10,480 --> 00:18:11,480 about you, ma'am. 292 00:18:11,480 --> 00:18:15,440 I'm just saying in general that I've seen this happen more than once, but I think we're 293 00:18:15,440 --> 00:18:16,440 away from the point now. 294 00:18:16,440 --> 00:18:17,440 I have another question. 295 00:18:17,440 --> 00:18:18,440 Yes. 296 00:18:18,440 --> 00:18:25,400 On the five that you, that staff is recommending, if that's because it's on Fout Street, not 297 00:18:25,400 --> 00:18:27,280 because it's on Oak Street. 298 00:18:27,280 --> 00:18:28,280 Correct. 299 00:18:28,280 --> 00:18:30,360 But it's due to the fact that it's visible from both. 300 00:18:30,360 --> 00:18:35,520 So say if you're at the corner of West Oak and Fouts, you'd be able to see it and due 301 00:18:35,520 --> 00:18:39,240 to vehicular traffic going that way and being able to have vehicular and pedestrian traffic 302 00:18:39,240 --> 00:18:40,240 on Fouts. 303 00:18:40,240 --> 00:18:41,240 So that is why staff is recommending. 304 00:18:41,240 --> 00:18:44,440 Is Fouts part of the Oak history, historic history? 305 00:18:44,440 --> 00:18:45,440 Yes. 306 00:18:45,440 --> 00:18:46,440 It does extend halfway down to Fouts. 307 00:18:46,440 --> 00:18:47,440 And you would see it coming. 308 00:18:47,440 --> 00:18:48,440 Hold on. 309 00:18:48,440 --> 00:18:50,640 It only extends halfway down on Fouts Street? 310 00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:51,640 Yes. 311 00:18:51,640 --> 00:18:59,360 Let me go back to my aerial. 312 00:18:59,360 --> 00:19:03,880 So it extends down to here, sorry, down to here. 313 00:19:03,880 --> 00:19:06,760 So right here is still within the historic district. 314 00:19:06,760 --> 00:19:12,160 So the fact that it's visible from West Oak and Fouts here, if you're vehicular or pedestrian 315 00:19:12,160 --> 00:19:17,320 traffic and being able to see visible, especially due to the fact that it probably won't need 316 00:19:17,320 --> 00:19:18,320 the trees. 317 00:19:18,320 --> 00:19:19,920 I don't know what to extend. 318 00:19:19,920 --> 00:19:26,600 They will be needed to be trimmed back a tiny bit that during the winter months you would 319 00:19:26,600 --> 00:19:27,880 be able to see them. 320 00:19:27,880 --> 00:19:29,200 Summer months, I'm not sure. 321 00:19:29,200 --> 00:19:30,200 I don't know. 322 00:19:30,200 --> 00:19:31,200 Yeah. 323 00:19:31,200 --> 00:19:34,760 I was going to say, I doubt during the summer months. 324 00:19:34,760 --> 00:19:38,800 So that is why staff is recommending the five trees be removed on that side. 325 00:19:38,800 --> 00:19:45,760 So that Fouts, including part of that historic district, is it just that one property that 326 00:19:45,760 --> 00:19:48,940 that encompasses right there on Fouts? 327 00:19:48,940 --> 00:19:50,800 Also the neighboring property across the street. 328 00:19:50,800 --> 00:19:51,800 Across the street though? 329 00:19:51,800 --> 00:19:52,800 Yes. 330 00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:53,800 Just those two? 331 00:19:53,800 --> 00:19:54,800 Yes. 332 00:19:54,800 --> 00:19:55,800 Just those two. 333 00:19:55,800 --> 00:19:56,800 The line goes down very strangely. 334 00:19:56,800 --> 00:19:57,800 Oh, I see that. 335 00:19:57,800 --> 00:19:58,800 That's why I'm asking. 336 00:19:58,800 --> 00:19:59,800 I just wanted... 337 00:19:59,800 --> 00:20:00,800 I'm sorry. 338 00:20:00,800 --> 00:20:01,800 If it helps to do Google, do you want me to do Google? 339 00:20:01,800 --> 00:20:02,800 No. 340 00:20:02,800 --> 00:20:03,800 No, no, no. 341 00:20:03,800 --> 00:20:04,800 You answered it for me. 342 00:20:04,800 --> 00:20:05,800 Okay. 343 00:20:05,800 --> 00:20:11,000 And then I did just want to note, it is in the packet, but I just wanted to note in terms 344 00:20:11,000 --> 00:20:16,100 of recommendations from the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation in regards to specifically 345 00:20:16,100 --> 00:20:17,900 solar panels. 346 00:20:17,900 --> 00:20:22,040 It does mention that installing solar panels horizontally, flat, or parallel, which these 347 00:20:22,040 --> 00:20:28,400 would be parallel, and that was stated to reduce visibility as one of the recommendations. 348 00:20:28,400 --> 00:20:32,320 Additionally, installing a solar device on the historic building in a manner that does 349 00:20:32,320 --> 00:20:38,000 not damage historic roofing material, which this is not historic, but or does not negatively 350 00:20:38,000 --> 00:20:40,760 impact the building's historic character and is reversible. 351 00:20:40,760 --> 00:20:44,960 So that is why staff provided their second recommendation as just confirming that it 352 00:20:44,960 --> 00:20:50,080 is reversible in the future if this property was to be sold and just to make sure that 353 00:20:50,080 --> 00:20:52,360 there's no damage to the historic building as well. 354 00:20:52,360 --> 00:20:55,200 But I just did want to add that from the standards. 355 00:20:55,200 --> 00:20:56,200 Thank you. 356 00:20:56,200 --> 00:20:57,200 That's all. 357 00:20:57,200 --> 00:20:58,200 Yeah. 358 00:20:58,200 --> 00:20:59,200 But... 359 00:20:59,200 --> 00:21:03,320 Do the guidelines that they have have anything about visibility from pedestrian areas or 360 00:21:03,320 --> 00:21:04,880 anything like that sort? 361 00:21:04,880 --> 00:21:05,880 Yes, it does. 362 00:21:05,880 --> 00:21:07,880 And I want to make sure I get the wording correct. 363 00:21:07,880 --> 00:21:08,880 So hold on. 364 00:21:08,880 --> 00:21:09,880 Let me just make sure. 365 00:21:09,880 --> 00:21:14,440 Installing a low profile solar device on the historic building so that it is not visible 366 00:21:14,440 --> 00:21:18,480 or only minimally visible from the public right of way is recommended. 367 00:21:18,480 --> 00:21:22,360 For example, on a flat roof and set back to take advantage of a parapet or other roof 368 00:21:22,360 --> 00:21:27,160 feature to screen solar panels for view or on a secondary slope of a roof out of view 369 00:21:27,160 --> 00:21:28,640 from the public right of way. 370 00:21:28,640 --> 00:21:32,120 So that is why staff recommended keeping these in the rear due to the fact that they were 371 00:21:32,120 --> 00:21:35,120 a secondary roof. 372 00:21:35,120 --> 00:21:45,980 Is there any more discussion? 373 00:21:45,980 --> 00:21:49,680 And how much view do you get on that one up there where you're recommending taking out 374 00:21:49,680 --> 00:21:50,680 the one? 375 00:21:50,680 --> 00:21:51,680 In terms of... 376 00:21:51,680 --> 00:21:52,680 Power or... 377 00:21:52,680 --> 00:21:53,680 Visibility. 378 00:21:53,680 --> 00:21:59,960 I'm not sure without an actual rendering, but due to the fact that it appears to be 379 00:21:59,960 --> 00:22:05,960 less than three feet from the roof's edge towards this front and just staff felt that 380 00:22:05,960 --> 00:22:09,680 it would be the most visible of the panels along that Western side. 381 00:22:09,680 --> 00:22:14,200 So that's why staff is recommending the removal of that panel, but then leaving the remainder 382 00:22:14,200 --> 00:22:16,800 of these panels, which would be seven panels. 383 00:22:16,800 --> 00:22:23,840 I'm trying to wrap my head around why one side we're worried because it's on a street 384 00:22:23,840 --> 00:22:25,920 that the ones across the street can see it. 385 00:22:25,920 --> 00:22:29,600 On the other side, the neighbors were not worried about that. 386 00:22:29,600 --> 00:22:32,360 The house across the street is not historical in that area. 387 00:22:32,360 --> 00:22:33,360 No, no, no, no, no. 388 00:22:33,360 --> 00:22:34,360 I'm not talking about that. 389 00:22:34,360 --> 00:22:35,360 I'm talking about on fouls. 390 00:22:35,360 --> 00:22:36,360 Okay. 391 00:22:36,360 --> 00:22:37,360 Okay. 392 00:22:37,360 --> 00:22:41,780 So we said because of maybe pedestrian, but we haven't said anything about the neighbors 393 00:22:41,780 --> 00:22:42,780 next door. 394 00:22:42,780 --> 00:22:49,280 So to me, it's not a saying either we're worried about it being visible or we're not. 395 00:22:49,280 --> 00:22:54,720 So that, I cannot wrap my mind around why one side, we don't want it here because maybe 396 00:22:54,720 --> 00:22:58,800 a vehicle could see it, but this side over here, these neighbors are going to see it 397 00:22:58,800 --> 00:22:59,800 all the time. 398 00:22:59,800 --> 00:23:00,800 Correct? 399 00:23:00,800 --> 00:23:01,800 But we haven't heard from them. 400 00:23:01,800 --> 00:23:02,800 Yeah. 401 00:23:02,800 --> 00:23:03,800 I mean, maybe. 402 00:23:03,800 --> 00:23:05,800 I mean, you can't, you can only limit, I think, Angie. 403 00:23:05,800 --> 00:23:08,800 I wonder why we're limiting it at all, is my point. 404 00:23:08,800 --> 00:23:15,440 Well, and you know, at a certain point you have to be flexible in the notion of technology 405 00:23:15,440 --> 00:23:16,440 changes, these kinds of things. 406 00:23:16,440 --> 00:23:20,080 I mean, how many houses in that neighborhood have gutters now that didn't originally? 407 00:23:20,080 --> 00:23:24,160 I mean, you could see it from the street, all these things, they're not permanently 408 00:23:24,160 --> 00:23:30,760 altering the structure and they serve a functional purpose and it's normalized now because everybody 409 00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:31,760 has them. 410 00:23:31,760 --> 00:23:37,680 And I'm wondering if this could be arguably the same thing where it may not be as normalized 411 00:23:37,680 --> 00:23:42,640 now as it may be five or 10 years from now, but if we're stuck in the same mindset of 412 00:23:42,640 --> 00:23:48,880 never going to be able to allow it or have it visible at all, then that evolution doesn't 413 00:23:48,880 --> 00:23:49,880 happen. 414 00:23:49,880 --> 00:23:53,520 Well, I mean, I would like to address the gutters. 415 00:23:53,520 --> 00:23:56,480 Gutters usually match the existing trim on the house. 416 00:23:56,480 --> 00:24:00,120 You cannot match this to the existing trim on the house, you cannot change the color 417 00:24:00,120 --> 00:24:01,120 of those panels yet. 418 00:24:01,120 --> 00:24:02,120 Change color of the trim. 419 00:24:02,120 --> 00:24:03,120 That changes historic characteristics. 420 00:24:03,120 --> 00:24:10,440 And secondly, the technology will advance such that, in fact, they actually exist except 421 00:24:10,440 --> 00:24:15,240 Elon Musk hasn't let it out again as they were making solar roofs, real roofs, but he's 422 00:24:15,240 --> 00:24:16,240 used it all up for Tesla. 423 00:24:16,240 --> 00:24:17,240 So yeah, they were. 424 00:24:17,240 --> 00:24:20,920 In fact, just before the last one that came about, there are these roof panels that would 425 00:24:20,920 --> 00:24:24,640 just exist and they would blend right in, and I would say no problem. 426 00:24:24,640 --> 00:24:30,760 So the technology is catching up, but these panels are really quite visible from the street. 427 00:24:30,760 --> 00:24:35,520 And I have no problem with letting the seven over here, as I drive down the street, going 428 00:24:35,520 --> 00:24:40,600 less all the time will show always, the eastern panels will always show. 429 00:24:40,600 --> 00:24:44,960 And if you've ever driven north on Locust, you will see the couple of buildings that stand 430 00:24:44,960 --> 00:24:45,960 out like a sore thumb. 431 00:24:45,960 --> 00:24:48,520 They do not fit in. 432 00:24:48,520 --> 00:24:55,200 So I would modify the one existing one facing west and let it be, because I don't think 433 00:24:55,200 --> 00:24:59,840 you can see much with most of the traffic going from east to west. 434 00:24:59,840 --> 00:25:10,560 You will see the east face. 435 00:25:10,560 --> 00:25:30,160 If they just took out the two on here, how much would they still see? 436 00:25:30,160 --> 00:25:35,560 The two that were street side. 437 00:25:35,560 --> 00:25:40,160 So these are all street side, but taking out these closest ones to the street. 438 00:25:40,160 --> 00:25:43,720 How high is that elevated, do you know? 439 00:25:43,720 --> 00:25:50,080 So this would be, so this is the secondary roof and this is the first floor roof. 440 00:25:50,080 --> 00:25:57,680 So you would still see all of those. 441 00:25:57,680 --> 00:26:01,320 And the secondary, where were the secondaries going to go on this picture? 442 00:26:01,320 --> 00:26:05,640 It would be on this roof line right here, it would be on that front roof line. 443 00:26:05,640 --> 00:26:10,280 And then show me again on the secondary and the other page. 444 00:26:10,280 --> 00:26:13,240 Where on this is the secondary? 445 00:26:13,240 --> 00:26:18,400 You would see, you would still have two solar panels visible, but due to the fact that they're 446 00:26:18,400 --> 00:26:23,800 on that secondary roof line, during the summer you wouldn't be able to have as high of visibility 447 00:26:23,800 --> 00:26:25,960 as you do during the winter. 448 00:26:25,960 --> 00:26:29,960 But due to the fact and based off the Secretary of Interior's standards, that's why staff 449 00:26:29,960 --> 00:26:31,760 made the recommendation of keeping these. 450 00:26:31,760 --> 00:26:36,360 Could you read the standards again, please? 451 00:26:36,360 --> 00:26:40,320 Well, I didn't provide... 452 00:26:40,320 --> 00:26:42,200 You have the other one you read. 453 00:26:42,200 --> 00:26:49,120 So these were provided in the backup. 454 00:26:49,120 --> 00:26:55,440 So in terms of the visibility, the standards recommends that they're not visible or only 455 00:26:55,440 --> 00:27:00,640 minimally visible from the public right of way. 456 00:27:00,640 --> 00:27:05,000 In terms of installing a solar device on the historic building, it should be done in a 457 00:27:05,000 --> 00:27:08,840 manner that does not damage the historic roofing material or negatively impact the building's 458 00:27:08,840 --> 00:27:12,480 historic character and is reversible. 459 00:27:12,480 --> 00:27:19,920 Solar panels should be installed horizontally, flat or parallel to the roof to reduce visibility. 460 00:27:19,920 --> 00:27:23,160 Who promulgated those? 461 00:27:23,160 --> 00:27:38,560 These are Secretary of Interior standards for rehabilitation. 462 00:27:38,560 --> 00:27:43,800 Do you know if there's any way to install those panels that would be a little bit lower? 463 00:27:43,800 --> 00:27:44,800 Lower to the roof? 464 00:27:44,800 --> 00:27:45,800 Yes. 465 00:27:45,800 --> 00:27:46,800 How could I know of? 466 00:27:46,800 --> 00:27:47,800 I'll do this. 467 00:27:47,800 --> 00:27:48,800 There we go. 468 00:27:48,800 --> 00:27:59,040 So this thing, I confirmed on the dimensions, I can't remember if you commented, it's 10 469 00:27:59,040 --> 00:28:03,000 to 10 inches from the roof to the face, if that helps? 470 00:28:03,000 --> 00:28:04,000 Correct. 471 00:28:04,000 --> 00:28:05,000 Yes. 472 00:28:05,000 --> 00:28:06,000 But it would be a maximum. 473 00:28:06,000 --> 00:28:09,000 Usually like eight to 10 inches off the roof. 474 00:28:09,000 --> 00:28:11,000 We've got some in our neighborhood. 475 00:28:11,000 --> 00:28:16,560 I see them all the time as we drive by, but obviously I'm not in a historic neighborhood 476 00:28:16,560 --> 00:28:39,520 and wouldn't be in one for that matter, but I just really would like, I'd like to be able 477 00:28:39,520 --> 00:28:47,120 to put solar panels on the roof. 478 00:28:47,120 --> 00:28:53,520 I appreciate them not trying to put them on the front and I think that goes without saying 479 00:28:53,520 --> 00:28:59,600 that I think that could definitely change, you know, the look of the neighborhood. 480 00:28:59,600 --> 00:29:06,800 But I actually think you'll see more driving west on Oak on the side than you will see 481 00:29:06,800 --> 00:29:10,440 on the front because as you approach from that side, that's what you're going to see 482 00:29:10,440 --> 00:29:12,080 because there's a street there. 483 00:29:12,080 --> 00:29:17,880 You will see that face more than anything else as you go by, the front face, that will 484 00:29:17,880 --> 00:29:18,920 show more. 485 00:29:18,920 --> 00:29:21,400 I'm happy to leave all of them on the west side. 486 00:29:21,400 --> 00:29:31,000 You know, people aren't driving the other way and most of our traffic is driving. 487 00:29:31,000 --> 00:29:36,160 And that's still 17 solar panels, which is more than most people put on their house, 488 00:29:36,160 --> 00:29:41,200 but I've counted in the past, so it's quite a good-sized panel, but something else. 489 00:29:41,200 --> 00:29:45,520 So this is a solar company, they specialize in installation and this is the number that 490 00:29:45,520 --> 00:29:46,520 they recommended? 491 00:29:46,520 --> 00:29:47,520 Is that correct? 492 00:29:47,520 --> 00:29:48,520 Exactly. 493 00:29:48,520 --> 00:29:52,280 Yeah, because we're not taking down all the trees to make a completely clear, you know, 494 00:29:52,280 --> 00:29:55,800 path that we have to have that many panels to make it worthwhile. 495 00:29:55,800 --> 00:30:00,480 So either taking down all the ones that are recommended, we may have to take some of the 496 00:30:00,480 --> 00:30:03,600 tree cover away and make a plan without those. 497 00:30:03,600 --> 00:30:07,440 You know, the trick is there is a tree ordinance, so taking them away is a little bit harder 498 00:30:07,440 --> 00:30:09,880 than you and just cutting them down because you don't want them. 499 00:30:09,880 --> 00:30:11,400 I'm not interested in taking them down. 500 00:30:11,400 --> 00:30:12,400 I agree with you. 501 00:30:12,400 --> 00:30:16,280 I mean, I actually said that before I believe you. 502 00:30:16,280 --> 00:30:19,720 And they're just out to maximize how many panels they install, which is their business, 503 00:30:19,720 --> 00:30:20,720 so that's fine. 504 00:30:20,720 --> 00:30:21,720 Have we gone any further on discussion? 505 00:30:21,720 --> 00:30:27,080 Is there anybody that wants to make a recommendation? 506 00:30:27,080 --> 00:30:33,160 I just, I feel like if the people next door wanted to put it on the same side of the house, 507 00:30:33,160 --> 00:30:36,400 we would say it's okay, because there's not a street there. 508 00:30:36,400 --> 00:30:41,040 So it's almost like you're penalizing these people because there's a street. 509 00:30:41,040 --> 00:30:42,040 I didn't tell them to buy it. 510 00:30:42,040 --> 00:30:43,040 Does that make sense? 511 00:30:43,040 --> 00:30:44,040 Yeah, but you can see it. 512 00:30:44,040 --> 00:30:45,040 That's the problem. 513 00:30:45,040 --> 00:30:48,880 As you drive down the street, it stands out. 514 00:30:48,880 --> 00:30:52,920 And I know there's some trees there that are going to be trimmed down, and you can see 515 00:30:52,920 --> 00:30:55,640 those panels that you can buy. 516 00:30:55,640 --> 00:30:59,120 And if you're going to minimize them, I think getting 17 is a pretty good number. 517 00:30:59,120 --> 00:31:04,000 I mean, I'm willing to take off the other west one and leave them half out. 518 00:31:04,000 --> 00:31:07,680 I'm not excited about those facing east. 519 00:31:07,680 --> 00:31:12,960 I'm ready to make a motion. 520 00:31:12,960 --> 00:31:18,640 That's a weak count on you. 521 00:31:18,640 --> 00:31:23,520 I mean, it helps with the energy. 522 00:31:23,520 --> 00:31:28,080 But remember, these are all things that are mined and processed and stuff. 523 00:31:28,080 --> 00:31:29,680 So it's not like it's greener here. 524 00:31:29,680 --> 00:31:38,680 I mean, it's greener here, not necessarily elsewhere. 525 00:31:38,680 --> 00:31:50,560 I'm not recommending that we approve the certificate of appropriateness request without conditions. 526 00:31:50,560 --> 00:31:51,560 No conditions from cameras. 527 00:31:51,560 --> 00:31:52,560 Okay. 528 00:31:52,560 --> 00:32:00,740 Should we have a discussion now? 529 00:32:00,740 --> 00:32:17,200 I just think maybe we need to look at the Historic Commission, no, Historic Properties 530 00:32:17,200 --> 00:32:18,200 with an idea. 531 00:32:18,200 --> 00:32:24,200 You know, in order to maintain these long term, they need to be feasible. 532 00:32:24,200 --> 00:32:31,240 And when we have things that will maintain the property and still be able to reduce the 533 00:32:31,240 --> 00:32:41,560 cost of living there, and all it would do is possibly offend somebody's eyes, I think 534 00:32:41,560 --> 00:32:44,560 that's asking a lot. 535 00:32:44,560 --> 00:32:46,800 I agree. 536 00:32:46,800 --> 00:32:52,520 I will point out as I also live in the Historic District, and you know, in that case, we don't 537 00:32:52,520 --> 00:32:53,520 need any regulations. 538 00:32:53,520 --> 00:32:54,920 Let's have a free for all. 539 00:32:54,920 --> 00:32:55,920 I love purple houses. 540 00:32:55,920 --> 00:32:56,920 I like to paint mine purple. 541 00:32:56,920 --> 00:33:04,720 There used to be one on Austin Street that was, or Oakland, Austin, it's very cute. 542 00:33:04,720 --> 00:33:07,000 They painted it over. 543 00:33:07,000 --> 00:33:13,240 But the regulations are put in here by the Secretary of the Interior. 544 00:33:13,240 --> 00:33:16,520 And it's not going to, I mean, I live in the Historic District, I have a bunch of trees. 545 00:33:16,520 --> 00:33:18,480 In fact, my house looks like yours from above. 546 00:33:18,480 --> 00:33:22,680 If you look at the, if you look at it on GIS maps, it looks the same. 547 00:33:22,680 --> 00:33:27,640 In fact, you can't find my roof in the summertime, it's covered over. 548 00:33:27,640 --> 00:33:33,560 So my highest bill, and I like my house cold, my highest bill has never cracked for electricity 549 00:33:33,560 --> 00:33:37,200 $350, ever. 550 00:33:37,200 --> 00:33:38,760 And it's the same size house. 551 00:33:38,760 --> 00:33:44,160 So I don't think the, yeah it is, it's 2,750 square feet, it's half the two story. 552 00:33:44,160 --> 00:33:48,880 So I don't think that $350 for two months out of the summer, because that's all it is. 553 00:33:48,880 --> 00:33:50,840 The rest of my timeline, 100 bucks. 554 00:33:50,840 --> 00:33:55,080 I don't think that is a huge savings to ask to keep the historic neighborhood. 555 00:33:55,080 --> 00:33:57,720 I mean, you didn't just buy it because of the trees, you bought it because you wanted 556 00:33:57,720 --> 00:33:59,120 to live in a historic neighborhood. 557 00:33:59,120 --> 00:34:03,880 Actually, ma'am, we had bought this house in 2001 before it was a historic neighborhood. 558 00:34:03,880 --> 00:34:08,560 So these regulations, we didn't move into a house with the Homeowners Association specifically 559 00:34:08,560 --> 00:34:12,320 because we didn't want this kind of oversight, this kind of regulation. 560 00:34:12,320 --> 00:34:17,180 And so now that we're in the historic district, we want to do what we need to do to comply. 561 00:34:17,180 --> 00:34:18,800 But we also want to be able to do things. 562 00:34:18,800 --> 00:34:24,400 My New Balance billing amount for the city for my energy bills is $360. 563 00:34:24,400 --> 00:34:26,760 And it's likely to go higher than that. 564 00:34:26,760 --> 00:34:31,780 So maybe your experience is different than mine, but our energy is high and getting higher. 565 00:34:31,780 --> 00:34:32,780 The electricity. 566 00:34:32,780 --> 00:34:36,440 May I ask, is this part of the motivation was to save electricity and save on the bill? 567 00:34:36,440 --> 00:34:37,440 Absolutely. 568 00:34:37,440 --> 00:34:38,440 Thank you. 569 00:34:38,440 --> 00:34:39,440 Oh, okay, that's just a discussion. 570 00:34:39,440 --> 00:34:42,640 Yeah, we have to close off public comments now. 571 00:34:42,640 --> 00:34:44,640 We're in the voting discussion. 572 00:34:44,640 --> 00:34:47,000 Lance, did you have more? 573 00:34:47,000 --> 00:34:48,000 No. 574 00:34:48,000 --> 00:34:52,600 I have a question with regard to the tree ordinance. 575 00:34:52,600 --> 00:34:55,840 Understand that the trees are being trimmed. 576 00:34:55,840 --> 00:35:01,240 Is there within the ordinance that they, regardless if it happens on 5 o'clock on Friday, that 577 00:35:01,240 --> 00:35:03,920 you're not supposed to cut down on the trees? 578 00:35:03,920 --> 00:35:10,040 And does it impact anything about how we're moving towards this decision? 579 00:35:10,040 --> 00:35:16,560 So in regards to the historic district, we do not have any regulation as a historic landmark 580 00:35:16,560 --> 00:35:18,440 commission over the trees themselves. 581 00:35:18,440 --> 00:35:23,920 That is a separate process that would be handled through the development services and through 582 00:35:23,920 --> 00:35:27,120 our permitting technicians, as well as our code enforcement. 583 00:35:27,120 --> 00:35:31,560 So that would be a separate if, say, if the trees were to be removed after hours and or 584 00:35:31,560 --> 00:35:34,160 without a permit, that would be handled by code enforcement. 585 00:35:34,160 --> 00:35:38,800 But under historic landmark commission, you all are not voting and do not have jurisdiction. 586 00:35:38,800 --> 00:35:42,520 Okay, so you can't say that the only condition would be that there would be only a trim and 587 00:35:42,520 --> 00:35:43,880 not removal of trees? 588 00:35:43,880 --> 00:35:44,880 No. 589 00:35:44,880 --> 00:35:45,880 Okay. 590 00:35:45,880 --> 00:35:46,880 Correct. 591 00:35:46,880 --> 00:35:47,880 Thank you. 592 00:35:47,880 --> 00:35:48,880 Correct. 593 00:35:48,880 --> 00:35:55,000 So is it possible to make an amendment to this or suggest an amendment? 594 00:35:55,000 --> 00:35:56,000 Yes. 595 00:35:56,000 --> 00:35:57,000 Yes. 596 00:35:57,000 --> 00:35:59,920 But Lynn, you would have to accept it. 597 00:35:59,920 --> 00:36:00,920 Yes. 598 00:36:00,920 --> 00:36:06,640 I would like to amend that we allow the panels, including the one that faces west, just not 599 00:36:06,640 --> 00:36:07,640 the east panels. 600 00:36:07,640 --> 00:36:08,640 Okay. 601 00:36:08,640 --> 00:36:09,640 Hold on. 602 00:36:09,640 --> 00:36:10,640 And so Leni would have to either accept or not. 603 00:36:10,640 --> 00:36:11,640 Yes. 604 00:36:11,640 --> 00:36:12,640 I know. 605 00:36:12,640 --> 00:36:13,640 So these would, this would stay. 606 00:36:13,640 --> 00:36:14,640 That would stay. 607 00:36:14,640 --> 00:36:15,640 But these would be still removed. 608 00:36:15,640 --> 00:36:16,640 No. 609 00:36:16,640 --> 00:36:17,640 Okay. 610 00:36:17,640 --> 00:36:18,640 Okay. 611 00:36:18,640 --> 00:36:19,640 So the amendment on the floor stands. 612 00:36:19,640 --> 00:36:20,640 So it stands. 613 00:36:20,640 --> 00:36:21,640 Sorry. 614 00:36:21,640 --> 00:36:22,640 It's not amended. 615 00:36:22,640 --> 00:36:23,640 Okay. 616 00:36:23,640 --> 00:36:24,640 The motion on the floor stands. 617 00:36:24,640 --> 00:36:25,640 The word that was supposed to come up. 618 00:36:25,640 --> 00:36:31,340 Other discussion, comments? 619 00:36:31,340 --> 00:36:38,640 Shall we have a vote? 620 00:36:38,640 --> 00:36:41,560 Shall we signify by raising hands? 621 00:36:41,560 --> 00:36:43,440 This is in support of Leni's proposal. 622 00:36:43,440 --> 00:36:44,440 Yes. 623 00:36:44,440 --> 00:36:45,440 Leni's proposal. 624 00:36:45,440 --> 00:36:50,440 All those in favor, raise your hand. 625 00:36:50,440 --> 00:36:51,440 Opposed? 626 00:36:51,440 --> 00:36:52,440 Passes. 627 00:36:52,440 --> 00:36:55,880 We need to take a break now? 628 00:36:55,880 --> 00:36:56,880 Yes. 629 00:36:56,880 --> 00:36:57,880 Yes. 630 00:36:57,880 --> 00:36:58,880 We'll take about a five minute break or so. 631 00:36:58,880 --> 00:36:59,880 Oh. 632 00:36:59,880 --> 00:37:00,880 Sorry. 633 00:37:00,880 --> 00:37:01,880 I was finding my page. 634 00:37:01,880 --> 00:37:02,880 No, you're totally fine. 635 00:37:02,880 --> 00:37:03,880 Yes. 636 00:37:03,880 --> 00:37:04,880 All right, everyone. 637 00:37:04,880 --> 00:37:05,880 I think we've had a good break. 638 00:37:05,880 --> 00:37:11,000 So hopefully we're all ready to get started on the second half of our agenda, which could 639 00:37:11,000 --> 00:37:12,000 take a little while. 640 00:37:12,000 --> 00:37:22,040 It is the work session and we'll open by discussing HLC 22-081A. 641 00:37:22,040 --> 00:37:26,600 Discuss and provide direction regarding those sections of subchapter two of the Denton Development 642 00:37:26,600 --> 00:37:31,960 Code pertaining to the historic landmark conditions, composition, operational procedures, and regulatory 643 00:37:31,960 --> 00:37:32,960 responsibilities. 644 00:37:32,960 --> 00:37:33,960 So I'm going to pull this up. 645 00:37:33,960 --> 00:37:34,960 It's kind of a large one. 646 00:37:34,960 --> 00:37:35,960 Is there a presentation? 647 00:37:35,960 --> 00:37:36,960 No. 648 00:37:36,960 --> 00:37:37,960 No. 649 00:37:37,960 --> 00:37:38,960 Is there a presentation? 650 00:37:38,960 --> 00:37:39,960 Oh, okay. 651 00:37:39,960 --> 00:37:40,960 Just here finally getting it here. 652 00:37:40,960 --> 00:37:41,960 Okay. 653 00:37:41,960 --> 00:38:03,800 So is this the section that you were talking about and break on the number of days or no? 654 00:38:03,800 --> 00:38:06,040 I think there's several sections that just do that. 655 00:38:06,040 --> 00:38:07,040 Yeah, kind of a little. 656 00:38:07,040 --> 00:38:17,440 Is this so big that it's a little, you know, maybe we should start an order from just the 657 00:38:17,440 --> 00:38:23,320 subchapter starting with like 2.2 and working our way down or just seeing if you have any 658 00:38:23,320 --> 00:38:25,320 initial ideas and we can go around. 659 00:38:25,320 --> 00:38:26,320 Hang on. 660 00:38:26,320 --> 00:38:27,320 No worries. 661 00:38:27,320 --> 00:38:28,320 No worries. 662 00:38:28,320 --> 00:38:50,520 Before we begin, I just wanted to reiterate what the purpose of this discussion is. 663 00:38:50,520 --> 00:38:57,040 This discussion was for the commission as a whole to provide direction to our definitions 664 00:38:57,040 --> 00:39:05,040 ad hoc committee, which is made up of Commissioner Cooper, Commissioner Cable, and Commissioner 665 00:39:05,040 --> 00:39:06,040 Stripling. 666 00:39:06,040 --> 00:39:11,480 And this is to help them start working on those edits and adjustments to subchapter 667 00:39:11,480 --> 00:39:17,480 two in regards to the historic Landmark Commission and those historic procedures that you all 668 00:39:17,480 --> 00:39:23,040 are encountering during staff's review and during these meetings. 669 00:39:23,040 --> 00:39:28,920 So I just wanted to remind you all what the purpose of this discussion is about. 670 00:39:28,920 --> 00:39:39,920 Looking for 2.2 table eventually. 671 00:39:39,920 --> 00:39:42,640 So taking a look at this, wow, okay. 672 00:39:42,640 --> 00:39:56,040 Ms. Hemingway. 673 00:39:56,040 --> 00:39:57,040 There was nothing specific. 674 00:39:57,040 --> 00:40:08,000 It was more just so I need to see if I specifically it would be on I guess the third page of the 675 00:40:08,000 --> 00:40:13,840 table itself where it's listed historic preservation procedures. 676 00:40:13,840 --> 00:40:17,800 Just make sure everything looks good there and then we're moving on to that next section, 677 00:40:17,800 --> 00:40:23,880 which is listed as the 2.3.6, which is in regards to the historic Landmark Commission. 678 00:40:23,880 --> 00:40:31,400 But I'm going to bring it up here in the meantime, just so that we have it online. 679 00:40:31,400 --> 00:40:34,320 Oh yeah, that'd be great. 680 00:40:34,320 --> 00:40:38,520 I actually don't think I have teams up, unless I can sign in here. 681 00:40:38,520 --> 00:40:39,520 Oh, I hate teams. 682 00:40:39,520 --> 00:40:40,520 I accidentally leave it like I did earlier. 683 00:40:40,520 --> 00:40:41,520 Do we have it on the hand? 684 00:40:41,520 --> 00:40:42,520 I don't know. 685 00:40:42,520 --> 00:40:43,520 Teams hates me. 686 00:40:43,520 --> 00:40:44,520 I'm not sure why. 687 00:40:44,520 --> 00:40:45,520 I think I have teams someplace else that just won't work. 688 00:40:45,520 --> 00:41:06,480 Do you know how to get to the home from here? 689 00:41:06,480 --> 00:41:22,000 I can't. 690 00:41:22,000 --> 00:41:25,080 So the three of you worked on this, right? 691 00:41:25,080 --> 00:41:29,960 So I think this is more to get us to a point where we can't. 692 00:41:29,960 --> 00:41:30,960 Yes. 693 00:41:30,960 --> 00:41:31,960 Yes. 694 00:41:31,960 --> 00:41:32,960 I see. 695 00:41:32,960 --> 00:41:38,000 So we had staff sent this prior to so that you all came with ideas that you could discuss 696 00:41:38,000 --> 00:41:45,040 during this time rather than us working and trying to gather ideas right at this moment 697 00:41:45,040 --> 00:41:46,040 during the meeting. 698 00:41:46,040 --> 00:41:47,040 Because that could take potentially hours. 699 00:41:47,040 --> 00:41:48,040 Are we in discussion at this point? 700 00:41:48,040 --> 00:41:49,040 Oh, yes. 701 00:41:49,040 --> 00:41:50,040 Yes, it's a work session. 702 00:41:50,040 --> 00:41:51,040 Okay. 703 00:41:51,040 --> 00:41:54,040 So I think one thing that prompted this is we have a lot of discussions about, for example, 704 00:41:54,040 --> 00:41:55,040 windows, right? 705 00:41:55,040 --> 00:42:03,360 And where are the guidelines for that? 706 00:42:03,360 --> 00:42:11,040 And that's just one example of kind of mentally seeing like a window in a frame. 707 00:42:11,040 --> 00:42:14,920 That's one item, but we have to build the frame. 708 00:42:14,920 --> 00:42:16,920 That seems to be missing from this. 709 00:42:16,920 --> 00:42:25,680 And I don't know, I'm looking really, I think we're looking really, if y'all let me know, 710 00:42:25,680 --> 00:42:29,620 you know, Angelique, in case, at 2.9.1 and following. 711 00:42:29,620 --> 00:42:36,040 And where do we want to, if we want to, put in more guidelines? 712 00:42:36,040 --> 00:42:38,720 And so that's on page like 109. 713 00:42:38,720 --> 00:42:39,720 Thank you. 714 00:42:39,720 --> 00:42:40,720 Sure. 715 00:42:40,720 --> 00:42:48,120 And then really, I would just point out, if folks are interested, on page 111, and this 716 00:42:48,120 --> 00:42:54,760 is under 2.9.2, the certificate of appropriateness, kind of talking about some of the principles 717 00:42:54,760 --> 00:42:57,400 that guide that. 718 00:42:57,400 --> 00:43:02,280 And I don't know, I just sort of had frankly drawn, I mean, because I'm the newest guy 719 00:43:02,280 --> 00:43:04,080 here, I don't really know where to start. 720 00:43:04,080 --> 00:43:07,240 And that's one reason I wanted to get feedback from you guys. 721 00:43:07,240 --> 00:43:12,800 I didn't know if we wanted to put in, if we wanted to edit, maybe condense a little bit 722 00:43:12,800 --> 00:43:18,000 of the Secretary of Interior's guidelines, and put this in here, but in our own wording. 723 00:43:18,000 --> 00:43:24,200 And before, while you're pondering that, Cameron, when you have a new, you know, application 724 00:43:24,200 --> 00:43:30,840 for this, do you sort it into those four buckets that the Secretary of Interior provides? 725 00:43:30,840 --> 00:43:32,840 You know, is this, is that the first thing you do? 726 00:43:32,840 --> 00:43:37,800 No, that's the first thing I do when I receive an application, the applicant themselves do 727 00:43:37,800 --> 00:43:43,800 not do that, myself as the HPO does that, and that's where I kind of break it down, 728 00:43:43,800 --> 00:43:49,400 is it preservation, is it rehabilitation, is it reconstruction. 729 00:43:49,400 --> 00:43:51,440 And so that's where I'm breaking it down to those four buckets. 730 00:43:51,440 --> 00:43:52,440 Okay. 731 00:43:52,440 --> 00:43:58,640 So I did wonder if maybe there would be value in us doing something similar in our own code. 732 00:43:58,640 --> 00:44:02,360 I'll just put that out there. 733 00:44:02,360 --> 00:44:10,880 I mean, one of the areas that we were stuck was what is preservation and what is like 734 00:44:10,880 --> 00:44:11,880 preservation. 735 00:44:11,880 --> 00:44:20,080 And did I just say that same thing, preservation, anyway, to me, they get intermingled. 736 00:44:20,080 --> 00:44:21,080 Sure. 737 00:44:21,080 --> 00:44:22,080 Oh, it's improvement. 738 00:44:22,080 --> 00:44:23,080 Improvement, yes. 739 00:44:23,080 --> 00:44:24,080 Rehabilitation. 740 00:44:24,080 --> 00:44:25,080 Rehabilitation. 741 00:44:25,080 --> 00:44:26,080 That's it. 742 00:44:26,080 --> 00:44:31,480 Rehabilitation and preservation, and we start looking at that, it's like, well, what are 743 00:44:31,480 --> 00:44:34,600 the meanings of all of those when you start looking? 744 00:44:34,600 --> 00:44:39,760 And to me, they just start really, it starts many in the water bit. 745 00:44:39,760 --> 00:44:45,480 But if we created our own structure, if you will, then we can, as a group, figure that 746 00:44:45,480 --> 00:44:46,480 out. 747 00:44:46,480 --> 00:44:50,880 But I'm just right now, I'm trying to figure out, do we want that much of a structure within 748 00:44:50,880 --> 00:44:51,880 our own? 749 00:44:51,880 --> 00:44:56,760 I don't see anything wrong with having a little more structure, perhaps, because I admit that 750 00:44:56,760 --> 00:45:01,680 the difference between preservation and rehabilitation, to me, is very, is sort of muddled. 751 00:45:01,680 --> 00:45:07,000 I think there is a better definition than I have, mentally, but that'll be up to you. 752 00:45:07,000 --> 00:45:11,560 Would it assist to, or would it be helpful to use the Secretary of Interior's standards 753 00:45:11,560 --> 00:45:17,160 of what preservation and rehabilitation is, and just use specifically their definitions? 754 00:45:17,160 --> 00:45:20,800 The problem is I don't think the city code uses those words. 755 00:45:20,800 --> 00:45:21,800 I think that was the problem. 756 00:45:21,800 --> 00:45:22,800 Correct, they do not. 757 00:45:22,800 --> 00:45:27,080 I think that was the problem, the city code, and they didn't directly translate. 758 00:45:27,080 --> 00:45:29,760 I'm sorry, is it an absence in the city code? 759 00:45:29,760 --> 00:45:30,760 No, they use different words altogether. 760 00:45:30,760 --> 00:45:31,760 They do. 761 00:45:31,760 --> 00:45:32,760 Remember, when we get together, it's all together different. 762 00:45:32,760 --> 00:45:33,760 Right, yeah. 763 00:45:33,760 --> 00:45:34,760 And we all went, "Wait a second." 764 00:45:34,760 --> 00:45:35,760 We could go from that, though. 765 00:45:35,760 --> 00:45:36,760 Yeah. 766 00:45:36,760 --> 00:45:46,480 But again, just to have an overarching framework, and then, as a group, we could put it up and 767 00:45:46,480 --> 00:45:50,400 we could literally edit on the fly, you know. 768 00:45:50,400 --> 00:45:55,520 But I think the one that stuck out in my mind was the improvement, the code, the city has 769 00:45:55,520 --> 00:46:00,320 used the word improvement, and we didn't know which one of those fell under, is that revotation, 770 00:46:00,320 --> 00:46:01,320 is that preservation? 771 00:46:01,320 --> 00:46:04,160 You could argue any one of those. 772 00:46:04,160 --> 00:46:09,240 Right, and if we do our due diligence here, and let's say that we deny something, and 773 00:46:09,240 --> 00:46:16,080 we do it for one of those reasons, it goes to council, and council is looking at totally 774 00:46:16,080 --> 00:46:24,560 different terminology, because that's what's in the code, city code, so it just gets real 775 00:46:24,560 --> 00:46:25,560 confusing. 776 00:46:25,560 --> 00:46:26,560 Sure. 777 00:46:26,560 --> 00:46:30,160 We may have to bend the Secretary of the Interior's things to it, but you know, that's... 778 00:46:30,160 --> 00:46:31,160 Oh, yeah. 779 00:46:31,160 --> 00:46:36,080 I mean, there's something behind this, though, is those are recommendations? 780 00:46:36,080 --> 00:46:45,480 Yeah, in some materials, the definitions are either at the front or back of words that 781 00:46:45,480 --> 00:46:49,920 make a difference, that really make a difference in what you're doing, and so you can look 782 00:46:49,920 --> 00:46:53,280 there and see how it's defined. 783 00:46:53,280 --> 00:47:01,760 Maybe that is something we should do, so that when we see this word, we know what it means. 784 00:47:01,760 --> 00:47:08,440 Even examples of an example of a rehabilitation or example, just to give a guideline, you 785 00:47:08,440 --> 00:47:11,800 know, not inclusive, but just as a one example. 786 00:47:11,800 --> 00:47:19,600 So Lenny, you mean in terms of, so say, in text, say it stated improvement, and then 787 00:47:19,600 --> 00:47:25,240 it provided the definition of improvement in that sentence, as it talks about, you know, 788 00:47:25,240 --> 00:47:33,040 as if you're going through a certificate of appropriateness, and you're looking into improvements, 789 00:47:33,040 --> 00:47:36,960 as such an improvement is this, and then it continues kind of the sentence on. 790 00:47:36,960 --> 00:47:38,800 Is that what you mean in terms of the text? 791 00:47:38,800 --> 00:47:39,800 No. 792 00:47:39,800 --> 00:47:46,320 I've seen it actually, there was a separate section in the, whatever it was, whatever 793 00:47:46,320 --> 00:47:52,000 ordinance or whatever you would need in which they defined the words, they were just all 794 00:47:52,000 --> 00:47:54,680 in a row, maybe two pages or something like that. 795 00:47:54,680 --> 00:48:00,760 Oh, are you talking, okay, the, are you talking about the definitions chapter that we have 796 00:48:00,760 --> 00:48:01,760 in our code? 797 00:48:01,760 --> 00:48:05,800 If, then can we add these in there? 798 00:48:05,800 --> 00:48:14,840 If there are terms that are not defined in the DDC that you feel need to be better addressed 799 00:48:14,840 --> 00:48:21,500 where they are defined, then as part of this discussion, we could entertain amendments 800 00:48:21,500 --> 00:48:24,160 to the DDC in the definitions section. 801 00:48:24,160 --> 00:48:29,760 So we put all the definitions, when we have an ordinance like the DDC, we try to keep 802 00:48:29,760 --> 00:48:34,800 all the like things in the like area, right, so all the definitions, we put in the definitions 803 00:48:34,800 --> 00:48:35,800 chapter. 804 00:48:35,800 --> 00:48:40,560 We try not to put standards in the, vary standards in the definitions subsection, we try to put 805 00:48:40,560 --> 00:48:43,920 those standards in whatever applicable section they need to be within it. 806 00:48:43,920 --> 00:48:48,440 So if there's, and then in another clue, and Ron, correct me if I'm wrong, Ron, you're 807 00:48:48,440 --> 00:48:49,440 welcome to come up here. 808 00:48:49,440 --> 00:48:54,440 Ron has been, I know y'all, some of you know Ron Mendita, our principal planner on our 809 00:48:54,440 --> 00:49:00,660 planning team through past work with the Historic Clean Work Commission, but also he's worked 810 00:49:00,660 --> 00:49:03,560 extensively on amendments to our DDC. 811 00:49:03,560 --> 00:49:09,080 And so one of the things, typically you'll know if a term is capitalized, then it's defined 812 00:49:09,080 --> 00:49:10,640 in the definition section. 813 00:49:10,640 --> 00:49:15,040 So that's one technique that's used so that the reader of the ordinance sees, wait a minute, 814 00:49:15,040 --> 00:49:20,000 this word is capitalized, so therefore, you know, I know to go look in the definition 815 00:49:20,000 --> 00:49:21,000 section. 816 00:49:21,000 --> 00:49:23,480 So we try to create those linkages if at all possible. 817 00:49:23,480 --> 00:49:29,080 Right, and Tina's correct, we want to keep those definitions in one area so that if there 818 00:49:29,080 --> 00:49:32,200 are changes to the definitions, they're not conflicting in the future. 819 00:49:32,200 --> 00:49:34,720 So that's the purpose. 820 00:49:34,720 --> 00:49:38,480 For the group that's putting together those suggested or recommended code amendments, 821 00:49:38,480 --> 00:49:43,440 yeah, I would suggest I start identifying those terms that are not in the development 822 00:49:43,440 --> 00:49:46,000 code, and then we can start to draft those definitions. 823 00:49:46,000 --> 00:49:51,000 Again, the purpose is really to help not only the HLC, but also the applicants that are 824 00:49:51,000 --> 00:49:56,920 also reviewing their applications through the development code as well. 825 00:49:56,920 --> 00:50:01,200 The other thing I might offer also, as you're considering whether or not 10-min certain 826 00:50:01,200 --> 00:50:11,380 components of the DEC as it relates to certificates of appropriateness, since that's 2.9, is so 827 00:50:11,380 --> 00:50:16,060 if there are areas where you're thinking you may want flexibility as part of your decision-making 828 00:50:16,060 --> 00:50:23,960 process, then either a separate policy might prove beneficial for evaluating certificates 829 00:50:23,960 --> 00:50:30,200 of appropriateness or the preservation plan if there's guidance in there. 830 00:50:30,200 --> 00:50:36,780 Also the standards provide the framework for the evaluation of certificates of appropriateness. 831 00:50:36,780 --> 00:50:39,960 So that's generally where you get more of your flexibility, right? 832 00:50:39,960 --> 00:50:45,320 When it's put into an ordinance, keep in mind ordinance is law, and so if someone is seeking 833 00:50:45,320 --> 00:50:51,000 relief from the DEC, then typically that relief has to go through the Zoning Board of Adjustment 834 00:50:51,000 --> 00:50:54,360 and they're subject to a different set of criteria for evaluation. 835 00:50:54,360 --> 00:51:00,560 So I only put that out there so that as the committee works through and the commission 836 00:51:00,560 --> 00:51:05,760 as a whole works through some potential amendment, you might keep that in mind that if there 837 00:51:05,760 --> 00:51:09,880 are areas where you think you may want some flexibility, then it's better to have that 838 00:51:09,880 --> 00:51:14,160 flexibility in the policy document or leaving that in the re-habilitation or the Secretary 839 00:51:14,160 --> 00:51:18,800 of Standards for evaluating the various certificates of appropriateness. 840 00:51:18,800 --> 00:51:23,280 Once it gets put into an ordinance and becomes law, then obviously it's much more stringent. 841 00:51:23,280 --> 00:51:28,280 So there may be certain things that the commission is wanting to see that are part of the ordinance 842 00:51:28,280 --> 00:51:33,260 because the criteria for relief under the ordinance is going to be much different than 843 00:51:33,260 --> 00:51:38,840 other criteria or that you may have that you find in some of your other documents, if that 844 00:51:38,840 --> 00:51:39,840 makes sense. 845 00:51:39,840 --> 00:51:42,160 I know Mary, you're looking at me kind of strangely, so. 846 00:51:42,160 --> 00:51:44,760 Yeah, that's the last bit kind of got me a little. 847 00:51:44,760 --> 00:51:45,760 Right. 848 00:51:45,760 --> 00:51:51,280 So keep in mind, so when regulations are put in the Denton Development Code or DDC, that's 849 00:51:51,280 --> 00:51:52,280 law, right? 850 00:51:52,280 --> 00:51:54,460 So they either meet or they don't. 851 00:51:54,460 --> 00:52:01,120 When a property owner or an applicant needs relief from the DDC because of how it's structured, 852 00:52:01,120 --> 00:52:02,640 that's considered a zoning regulation. 853 00:52:02,640 --> 00:52:08,000 So it has to go before the Zoning Board of Adjustment for relief. 854 00:52:08,000 --> 00:52:14,200 If you're finding as you're evaluating certificates of appropriateness that sometimes there is 855 00:52:14,200 --> 00:52:19,160 some gray areas, whether or not it's appropriate or not, I mean, we had a good example of that 856 00:52:19,160 --> 00:52:20,160 tonight, right? 857 00:52:20,160 --> 00:52:27,640 And your flexibility comes from those applications being evaluated under the standards, right? 858 00:52:27,640 --> 00:52:32,160 So and you have the opportunity to debate more of the standards and that offers you 859 00:52:32,160 --> 00:52:38,320 more flexibility compared to what you get out of the DDC because the DDC is essentially 860 00:52:38,320 --> 00:52:40,840 we try to make it as black or white as possible, right? 861 00:52:40,840 --> 00:52:43,560 So it's either permitted or it's not. 862 00:52:43,560 --> 00:52:51,200 So it's as you think about what amendments we might want to address or additional text 863 00:52:51,200 --> 00:52:56,880 that we might want to include in the DDC, just think about that aspect also of, okay, 864 00:52:56,880 --> 00:53:01,080 are we okay with having that true, a hard, hard, fast regulatory item that's provided 865 00:53:01,080 --> 00:53:07,320 for in the DDC or is this something where we might want to be able to have more flexibility 866 00:53:07,320 --> 00:53:12,840 for evaluating a request that the standards give us the opportunity for? 867 00:53:12,840 --> 00:53:17,120 So that's why I put that out there because going through the Zoning Board of Adjustment 868 00:53:17,120 --> 00:53:21,400 for Relief from the Debt and Development Code has a different set of criteria, one of which 869 00:53:21,400 --> 00:53:25,520 is typically property hardship that has to be demonstrated and it's very difficult for 870 00:53:25,520 --> 00:53:29,080 property owners to be, to demonstrate property hardships. 871 00:53:29,080 --> 00:53:31,840 So that's why I put that out there. 872 00:53:31,840 --> 00:53:36,240 So it's, I mean, there's probably still going to be some changes that you made in the code 873 00:53:36,240 --> 00:53:37,240 itself, more generally. 874 00:53:37,240 --> 00:53:43,680 Do you think it would be more useful to use the guidelines feature? 875 00:53:43,680 --> 00:53:51,080 So what is it, it's 236(c)(1)(b) says that one of the powers and duties of the Historic 876 00:53:51,080 --> 00:53:55,120 Landmark Commission is to establish guidelines to be used in determination whether to grant 877 00:53:55,120 --> 00:53:57,120 or deny certificates of appropriate. 878 00:53:57,120 --> 00:54:03,400 Oh, for demolition, you know, to finish reading that sentence. 879 00:54:03,400 --> 00:54:08,440 Is there something similar, some kind of mechanism that's similar as far as making guidelines 880 00:54:08,440 --> 00:54:14,280 that wouldn't have the same effect as a line in the code? 881 00:54:14,280 --> 00:54:22,360 Yes, I mean, if the commission wanted to put forth a set of guidelines for evaluating certain 882 00:54:22,360 --> 00:54:25,280 types of requests, you have the ability to be able to do so. 883 00:54:25,280 --> 00:54:28,280 I kind of think of like a criteria manual, if you will. 884 00:54:28,280 --> 00:54:29,280 Design guidelines. 885 00:54:29,280 --> 00:54:30,280 Yeah. 886 00:54:30,280 --> 00:54:31,280 Right. 887 00:54:31,280 --> 00:54:36,320 So that, because then when it's guidelines, it still gives you some of that flexibility 888 00:54:36,320 --> 00:54:40,800 that the ordinance tells you for evaluating certificate of appropriateness, the commission 889 00:54:40,800 --> 00:54:49,080 shall consider the Secretary of Interior standards, and also this guidelines document that the 890 00:54:49,080 --> 00:54:50,080 city has adopted. 891 00:54:50,080 --> 00:54:51,080 Right? 892 00:54:51,080 --> 00:54:52,080 So... 893 00:54:52,080 --> 00:54:53,080 It actually says that. 894 00:54:53,080 --> 00:55:01,200 Any applicable guidelines adopted by the city, and that is under 292 compliance required 895 00:55:01,200 --> 00:55:02,200 number 9. 896 00:55:02,200 --> 00:55:03,200 Number 9. 897 00:55:03,200 --> 00:55:08,400 So as you were talking, Tina, it talks about guidelines as well. 898 00:55:08,400 --> 00:55:11,400 Well, I can say 292. 899 00:55:11,400 --> 00:55:12,400 292. 900 00:55:12,400 --> 00:55:13,400 292. 901 00:55:13,400 --> 00:55:14,400 Under appeal. 902 00:55:14,400 --> 00:55:15,400 I think it's under appeal. 903 00:55:15,400 --> 00:55:16,400 292. 904 00:55:16,400 --> 00:55:17,400 292. 905 00:55:17,400 --> 00:55:18,400 292. 906 00:55:18,400 --> 00:55:19,400 292. 907 00:55:19,400 --> 00:55:20,400 292. 908 00:55:20,400 --> 00:55:21,400 292. 909 00:55:21,400 --> 00:55:22,400 292. 910 00:55:22,400 --> 00:55:23,400 292. 911 00:55:23,400 --> 00:55:24,400 292. 912 00:55:24,400 --> 00:55:25,400 292. 913 00:55:25,400 --> 00:55:26,400 292. 914 00:55:26,400 --> 00:55:27,400 Under appeal. 915 00:55:27,400 --> 00:55:28,400 I think it's under appeal. 916 00:55:28,400 --> 00:55:29,400 292. 917 00:55:29,400 --> 00:55:30,400 292. 918 00:55:30,400 --> 00:55:31,400 I thought the relief went through City Council. 919 00:55:31,400 --> 00:55:32,400 That's what's happened in the past. 920 00:55:32,400 --> 00:55:33,400 That's why I'm confused. 921 00:55:33,400 --> 00:55:34,400 So it depends on what process they're going under. 922 00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:35,400 There's kind of two options. 923 00:55:35,400 --> 00:55:36,400 So there can appeal your decision to City Council, but if they're requesting zoning relief, 924 00:55:36,400 --> 00:55:37,400 which would be either removing a landmark designation or asking to be removed from a 925 00:55:37,400 --> 00:55:38,400 historic district, that would require to start at the ZBA process and then move through 926 00:55:38,400 --> 00:55:39,400 that according link. 927 00:55:39,400 --> 00:55:40,400 I see. 928 00:55:40,400 --> 00:55:41,400 But in that sense, I think that's a good question. 929 00:55:41,400 --> 00:55:42,400 That's a good question. 930 00:55:42,400 --> 00:56:04,760 And that's specific to a landmark designation, but if there's a regulation that's included 931 00:56:04,760 --> 00:56:10,480 elsewhere, regulating historic properties, depending upon how it's structured, that in 932 00:56:10,480 --> 00:56:15,160 all likelihood that relief would have to go towards the Zoning Board of Adjustment. 933 00:56:15,160 --> 00:56:21,120 So because the examples that Marcella cited, when it deals with designation of a property 934 00:56:21,120 --> 00:56:25,760 or the district itself, she's correct because that's considered a rezoning action and HLC, 935 00:56:25,760 --> 00:56:31,480 or excuse me, a certificate of appropriateness for, I guess it's not a certificate of appropriateness. 936 00:56:31,480 --> 00:56:35,200 Just an action for designating a property is considered a zoning action. 937 00:56:35,200 --> 00:56:38,600 So hence why it starts here, then it goes to the Planning and Zoning Commission, ultimately 938 00:56:38,600 --> 00:56:39,600 the City Council. 939 00:56:39,600 --> 00:56:45,200 But if there were some other provision that was written in the ordinance that is not tied 940 00:56:45,200 --> 00:56:53,160 to the rezoning of a property, like an overlay designation, then normally that relief is 941 00:56:53,160 --> 00:56:55,200 sent through the Zoning Board of Adjustment. 942 00:56:55,200 --> 00:57:00,480 And again, it depends upon where it's occurring and how it's written within the ordinance 943 00:57:00,480 --> 00:57:01,480 itself. 944 00:57:01,480 --> 00:57:09,480 So it comes down to where do we wordsmith and as we wordsmith, we need to think about 945 00:57:09,480 --> 00:57:11,520 if we want flexibility from that. 946 00:57:11,520 --> 00:57:16,440 So if we're trying to provide criteria for evaluating certificates of appropriateness 947 00:57:16,440 --> 00:57:21,920 and we want to set a guidelines, then like Skimmer, as you were case, when you asked 948 00:57:21,920 --> 00:57:26,520 the question about would we be better off having a guidelines document to be able to 949 00:57:26,520 --> 00:57:34,240 help us evaluate, yes, because that helps to give you some flexibility on the gray areas. 950 00:57:34,240 --> 00:57:41,140 Guidelines sound kind of good because I guess Lance, you brought up the problem with windows 951 00:57:41,140 --> 00:57:47,040 and doors and locks and things start to get a little on the fine points. 952 00:57:47,040 --> 00:57:50,040 Well, you want to be consistent with everybody. 953 00:57:50,040 --> 00:57:51,040 Well, that is a problem. 954 00:57:51,040 --> 00:57:52,040 Yeah. 955 00:57:52,040 --> 00:57:53,040 And we could try to hash that out in our guidelines. 956 00:57:53,040 --> 00:57:54,040 Yeah. 957 00:57:54,040 --> 00:57:55,040 I think you have a tough task. 958 00:57:55,040 --> 00:57:56,040 Right. 959 00:57:56,040 --> 00:57:57,040 You would agree. 960 00:57:57,040 --> 00:58:03,640 As far as guidelines, would that need to be adopted by ordinance in New York, could be 961 00:58:03,640 --> 00:58:06,920 something that the HLC. 962 00:58:06,920 --> 00:58:10,440 So I think it depends on what effect the HLC wants them to have. 963 00:58:10,440 --> 00:58:15,320 If they're kind of just a position statement of the HLC that exists to give guidance to 964 00:58:15,320 --> 00:58:19,640 Cameron, but not necessarily direction, then that would be, that could be adopted just 965 00:58:19,640 --> 00:58:20,640 by the HLC. 966 00:58:20,640 --> 00:58:24,720 If it's something that you want to have more force, like a criteria manual, that would 967 00:58:24,720 --> 00:58:27,480 need to go through the criteria manual process. 968 00:58:27,480 --> 00:58:29,280 And the city council. 969 00:58:29,280 --> 00:58:30,280 Yes. 970 00:58:30,280 --> 00:58:31,280 Correct. 971 00:58:31,280 --> 00:58:32,280 Which is ordinance. 972 00:58:32,280 --> 00:58:34,280 The HLC review says as well. 973 00:58:34,280 --> 00:58:35,280 Yes. 974 00:58:35,280 --> 00:58:36,280 They provide a recommendation. 975 00:58:36,280 --> 00:58:37,280 Yes. 976 00:58:37,280 --> 00:58:40,280 So go through HLC, then PNC and then on the city council. 977 00:58:40,280 --> 00:58:41,280 Okay. 978 00:58:41,280 --> 00:58:42,280 So. 979 00:58:42,280 --> 00:58:45,280 And we can talk about that further because especially if it's coming from the HLC, it 980 00:58:45,280 --> 00:58:47,280 may just be able to go from HLC to council. 981 00:58:47,280 --> 00:58:50,280 But if that was something, I mean, we can obviously research that. 982 00:58:50,280 --> 00:58:51,280 Yes. 983 00:58:51,280 --> 00:58:52,280 Yeah. 984 00:58:52,280 --> 00:58:54,280 We have to look into the specific process for like a historic criteria manual. 985 00:58:54,280 --> 00:58:58,280 But for other criteria manuals, they do go to PNC and then to council. 986 00:58:58,280 --> 00:59:05,280 I think guys are asking us to do that instead of having to go through all the... 987 00:59:05,280 --> 00:59:11,280 It does give residents an opportunity to come in and say, hey, mine's different because 988 00:59:11,280 --> 00:59:12,280 it does. 989 00:59:12,280 --> 00:59:15,280 And then it gives us a little way to be able to act on that. 990 00:59:15,280 --> 00:59:16,280 Here's my issue though. 991 00:59:16,280 --> 00:59:19,280 So, and maybe this is just me looking way too at this one thing. 992 00:59:19,280 --> 00:59:24,280 When I look at the powers and duties list of the historic landmark commission, it's a 993 00:59:24,280 --> 00:59:30,280 very specific itemized list of what the powers and duties of the HLC are. 994 00:59:30,280 --> 00:59:31,280 Where is that? 995 00:59:31,280 --> 00:59:32,280 First page. 996 00:59:32,280 --> 00:59:33,280 236. 997 00:59:33,280 --> 00:59:34,280 Yeah. 998 00:59:34,280 --> 00:59:41,280 And so I'm not sure if there's another place that gives authority outside of that. 999 00:59:41,280 --> 00:59:48,280 And if not, do we need to have the city council make some kind of amendment to provide authority 1000 00:59:48,280 --> 00:59:52,280 to promulgate guidelines and those kinds of things? 1001 00:59:52,280 --> 00:59:59,280 Because the way it's written, it's very specific and very limiting on what it is that we can 1002 00:59:59,280 --> 01:00:02,280 even do here. 1003 01:00:02,280 --> 01:00:07,280 And some of that may come from... 1004 01:00:07,280 --> 01:00:08,280 Exactly. 1005 01:00:08,280 --> 01:00:19,280 Besides not being clear on what things meant when written about our duties versus maybe 1006 01:00:19,280 --> 01:00:24,280 about council or planning the zoning, what was it that you all were coming up against? 1007 01:00:24,280 --> 01:00:25,280 The difficulty. 1008 01:00:25,280 --> 01:00:26,280 It's been a bit... 1009 01:00:26,280 --> 01:00:37,280 But if I remember correctly, it came down to, you know, when we first started talking about, 1010 01:00:37,280 --> 01:00:43,280 because windows were such a hot topic, it was like, okay, what does the HLC have authority 1011 01:00:43,280 --> 01:00:46,280 to even do on that? 1012 01:00:46,280 --> 01:00:49,280 Because if we want to have a policy on that, where does that authority come from in the 1013 01:00:49,280 --> 01:00:50,280 code and that sort of thing? 1014 01:00:50,280 --> 01:00:59,280 And then the code was using words that I guess the instructions weren't and that caused some 1015 01:00:59,280 --> 01:01:04,280 havoc because we were like, well, does this even apply? 1016 01:01:04,280 --> 01:01:08,280 Because the one that really sticks out to me was improvement, which wasn't really well 1017 01:01:08,280 --> 01:01:09,280 defined at all. 1018 01:01:09,280 --> 01:01:10,280 Yeah. 1019 01:01:10,280 --> 01:01:15,280 So I think just going back to when the ad hoc committee was created, city council specifically 1020 01:01:15,280 --> 01:01:19,280 delegated authority for the improvements discussion. 1021 01:01:19,280 --> 01:01:21,280 They also struggled with that. 1022 01:01:21,280 --> 01:01:25,280 And I'd have to go back and watch the council meeting to get more information because it 1023 01:01:25,280 --> 01:01:33,280 has been quite some time, but there was specific delegation to HLC to review kind of the components 1024 01:01:33,280 --> 01:01:36,280 of the code that we're discussing. 1025 01:01:36,280 --> 01:01:38,280 So I know improvements came up. 1026 01:01:38,280 --> 01:01:45,280 Improvements, rehabilitation, specifically in regards to our tax incentives and our tax 1027 01:01:45,280 --> 01:01:46,280 exemptions. 1028 01:01:46,280 --> 01:01:52,280 So where those words are coming up in terms of what is considered rehabbing or maintenance 1029 01:01:52,280 --> 01:01:54,280 and what's considered improvement. 1030 01:01:54,280 --> 01:02:00,280 And so that's where city council was having issues in terms of understanding exactly what 1031 01:02:00,280 --> 01:02:03,280 is an improvement, what is rehabilitation. 1032 01:02:03,280 --> 01:02:08,280 And so that is the reason as to why the definitions ad hoc was created. 1033 01:02:08,280 --> 01:02:15,280 But then once it was established, the subcommittee decided that we needed to look at subchapter 1034 01:02:15,280 --> 01:02:23,280 two as a whole in regards to historic preservation and historic preservation procedures and the 1035 01:02:23,280 --> 01:02:28,280 historic landmark commission and see if there needed to be any updates made based off our 1036 01:02:28,280 --> 01:02:34,280 experiences in the past and having these discussions not only with applicants, but amongst yourselves. 1037 01:02:34,280 --> 01:02:37,280 And I think going back to Keeson's specific question on where the authority lands, I think 1038 01:02:37,280 --> 01:02:41,280 it comes from the implied review of the certificates of appropriateness. 1039 01:02:41,280 --> 01:02:46,280 So because you are the entity who are reviewing those documents, if you want to create a standard 1040 01:02:46,280 --> 01:02:50,280 for what that review looks like just among your group that you'd review annually or that 1041 01:02:50,280 --> 01:02:55,280 you'd come up as a position statement to review bi-annually or every five years or something 1042 01:02:55,280 --> 01:03:00,280 like that, you can decide as a group kind of what you want your guidelines to look like. 1043 01:03:00,280 --> 01:03:05,280 But I think that would come from your power as the reviewers of the COA. 1044 01:03:05,280 --> 01:03:12,280 So they would either need to be directly tied to the review process of the COA and the guidelines 1045 01:03:12,280 --> 01:03:17,280 you'd use to make those decisions or it'd be related to this kind of separate discussion 1046 01:03:17,280 --> 01:03:23,280 that council directed HLC to look at, which was the improvements and rehabilitation definitions. 1047 01:03:23,280 --> 01:03:28,280 I think we had a discussion about how much money it actually was a year that you saved 1048 01:03:28,280 --> 01:03:31,280 by getting the HLC historic landmark thing. 1049 01:03:31,280 --> 01:03:35,280 It hardly, I think when you calculate, you did a calculation, didn't you? 1050 01:03:35,280 --> 01:03:38,280 It was pretty small, as I recall. 1051 01:03:38,280 --> 01:03:40,280 My husband said it was almost worth not doing. 1052 01:03:40,280 --> 01:03:42,280 There was, I mean, it depends on where it is. 1053 01:03:42,280 --> 01:03:48,280 There was a building downtown where it was going to save $20,000 or $30,000 a year. 1054 01:03:48,280 --> 01:03:49,280 That's a lot. 1055 01:03:49,280 --> 01:03:51,280 I mean, those are very high-value properties. 1056 01:03:51,280 --> 01:03:56,280 Well, you know, my support value. 1057 01:03:56,280 --> 01:04:01,280 And I think our discussion, too, was, you know, as a commission here, 1058 01:04:01,280 --> 01:04:06,280 I think we want people to upkeep their properties. 1059 01:04:06,280 --> 01:04:09,280 But are we giving them an incentive to be able to do it? 1060 01:04:09,280 --> 01:04:13,280 Are we constantly standing back and saying no, no, no, no, no? 1061 01:04:13,280 --> 01:04:17,280 Or what is, what's the give and take here? 1062 01:04:17,280 --> 01:04:21,280 So if we had a set of guidelines that they would know ahead of time, 1063 01:04:21,280 --> 01:04:26,280 because a lot of times people buy a property and then we want to blame a realtor. 1064 01:04:26,280 --> 01:04:28,280 Oh, you should have told them it's a historic district. 1065 01:04:28,280 --> 01:04:29,280 They didn't know that. 1066 01:04:29,280 --> 01:04:31,280 And they have all these grand ideas. 1067 01:04:31,280 --> 01:04:34,280 And then they come here and we say, we can't do it. 1068 01:04:34,280 --> 01:04:37,280 But we really want you to upkeep your property. 1069 01:04:37,280 --> 01:04:38,280 Yeah. 1070 01:04:38,280 --> 01:04:41,280 And that reminds me, there was something I was thinking about at the time. 1071 01:04:41,280 --> 01:04:45,280 And this was in the discussion of what kind of penalties there may or may not have been 1072 01:04:45,280 --> 01:04:47,280 and how to enforce things. 1073 01:04:47,280 --> 01:04:49,280 And I was trying to use the carrot. 1074 01:04:49,280 --> 01:04:55,280 Instead, since we do have some say into who to give the tax benefits to 1075 01:04:55,280 --> 01:05:00,280 and try to more formally figure out exactly how that should go. 1076 01:05:00,280 --> 01:05:05,280 You know, if we could put more stringent requirements on that to say, you know, 1077 01:05:05,280 --> 01:05:10,280 you haven't violated the historical board, you know, 1078 01:05:10,280 --> 01:05:15,280 you haven't done any work without getting pre-approval with the COA first or something like that, 1079 01:05:15,280 --> 01:05:18,280 at least some type of incentive to actually go through with it 1080 01:05:18,280 --> 01:05:23,280 instead of using the stick method which is punishable in afterwards. 1081 01:05:23,280 --> 01:05:28,280 Well, I mean, there's a lot of benefits for commercial entities, especially. 1082 01:05:28,280 --> 01:05:30,280 I mean, they're excellent benefits. 1083 01:05:30,280 --> 01:05:32,280 I think that should say some of the good buildings. 1084 01:05:32,280 --> 01:05:34,280 I think they're lesser for homeowners. 1085 01:05:34,280 --> 01:05:36,280 But I think a set of guidelines would help. 1086 01:05:36,280 --> 01:05:38,280 If I didn't live in the historic district and I wasn't on this, 1087 01:05:38,280 --> 01:05:43,280 I'm not sure I would know all of the rules and regulations before, you know, 1088 01:05:43,280 --> 01:05:44,280 before you wanted to do something. 1089 01:05:44,280 --> 01:05:49,280 Now, I don't know that I always know them because I think Tina gave me something new last time we met. 1090 01:05:49,280 --> 01:05:51,280 Boundary changed, right? 1091 01:05:51,280 --> 01:05:53,280 Between fence line and building. 1092 01:05:53,280 --> 01:05:54,280 Oh, okay. 1093 01:05:54,280 --> 01:05:55,280 Three feet. 1094 01:05:55,280 --> 01:05:56,280 Yes. 1095 01:05:56,280 --> 01:05:57,280 Larger. 1096 01:05:57,280 --> 01:05:58,280 I was impressed. 1097 01:05:58,280 --> 01:05:59,280 I was like, I was excited. 1098 01:05:59,280 --> 01:06:04,280 And I think if we, as we go through this, leaving some openness for a change, 1099 01:06:04,280 --> 01:06:11,280 is I think back when maybe I started on the HLC, solar panels weren't even a topic. 1100 01:06:11,280 --> 01:06:12,280 Right. 1101 01:06:12,280 --> 01:06:13,280 You know? 1102 01:06:13,280 --> 01:06:16,280 And you look at how technology grows and what other things might be, 1103 01:06:16,280 --> 01:06:18,280 and you don't want to just say this is it. 1104 01:06:18,280 --> 01:06:24,280 So I think that's why the guidelines would be nice with leeway for changes. 1105 01:06:24,280 --> 01:06:28,280 How many applications for solar panels are there even then? 1106 01:06:28,280 --> 01:06:30,280 I've counted three. 1107 01:06:30,280 --> 01:06:33,280 I'd say, yeah, about four or five, yeah. 1108 01:06:33,280 --> 01:06:35,280 I can remember seeing three come through. 1109 01:06:35,280 --> 01:06:37,280 I was saying this, I've been here almost two years, 1110 01:06:37,280 --> 01:06:40,280 and this is the first time I've seen solar panels come through. 1111 01:06:40,280 --> 01:06:42,280 I remember the first one was a pretty heated one. 1112 01:06:42,280 --> 01:06:45,280 That was the house across the street that we talked about today. 1113 01:06:45,280 --> 01:06:47,280 But it was a new house. 1114 01:06:47,280 --> 01:06:48,280 But it's not a historical house? 1115 01:06:48,280 --> 01:06:49,280 Oh, you just knew it? 1116 01:06:49,280 --> 01:06:50,280 It was a new construction. 1117 01:06:50,280 --> 01:06:51,280 Oh, because it's in the district. 1118 01:06:51,280 --> 01:06:52,280 It's in the district, yeah. 1119 01:06:52,280 --> 01:06:54,280 But I think it wasn't quite a district yet. 1120 01:06:54,280 --> 01:06:56,280 I think it was still a... 1121 01:06:56,280 --> 01:07:00,280 But I guess to get us back in terms of topic, 1122 01:07:00,280 --> 01:07:05,280 I was just saying, what is the subcommittee, 1123 01:07:05,280 --> 01:07:11,280 is this helpful conversation or do we need to have specific questions? 1124 01:07:11,280 --> 01:07:15,280 Or I guess... 1125 01:07:15,280 --> 01:07:21,280 I mean, I would like something a little bit more concrete in the code. 1126 01:07:21,280 --> 01:07:24,280 I mean, if we're getting a wish list here, things take shape. 1127 01:07:24,280 --> 01:07:29,280 City Council, something more concrete in the powers and duties 1128 01:07:29,280 --> 01:07:34,280 that specifically says that we have the authority to establish guidelines 1129 01:07:34,280 --> 01:07:40,280 or a policy statement or something regarding either definitions 1130 01:07:40,280 --> 01:07:42,280 that aren't laid out in the code 1131 01:07:42,280 --> 01:07:50,280 or policy for determination of different items. 1132 01:07:50,280 --> 01:07:53,280 I'm not real crazy about the idea that we just had this implied authority 1133 01:07:53,280 --> 01:07:54,280 because of the COA. 1134 01:07:54,280 --> 01:07:56,280 It just kind of says, if it's not against the rules, 1135 01:07:56,280 --> 01:08:03,280 you just kind of do whatever. 1136 01:08:03,280 --> 01:08:07,280 Okay, I hope you kind of stick close to the Secretary of the Interior standards. 1137 01:08:07,280 --> 01:08:08,280 At least they're somewhat defined. 1138 01:08:08,280 --> 01:08:10,280 I mean, they're not great, but... 1139 01:08:10,280 --> 01:08:13,280 I mean, they're kind of vague in many ways in a sense. 1140 01:08:13,280 --> 01:08:14,280 I mean, there's some... 1141 01:08:14,280 --> 01:08:18,280 There's some specificity to some of the aspects of the standards, 1142 01:08:18,280 --> 01:08:20,280 but yes, it is just a guideline. 1143 01:08:20,280 --> 01:08:23,280 It is recommendations. 1144 01:08:23,280 --> 01:08:29,280 I think to call yourselves historic, you do need to keep those in the code. 1145 01:08:29,280 --> 01:08:32,280 If you want to consider yourself a historic property 1146 01:08:32,280 --> 01:08:35,280 or a historic district, National Park Service, 1147 01:08:35,280 --> 01:08:41,280 they are what defines historic preservation and what is historic. 1148 01:08:41,280 --> 01:08:45,280 So I think if we were to remove those at any sense in any way, 1149 01:08:45,280 --> 01:08:49,280 I think we would do ourselves a disservice. 1150 01:08:49,280 --> 01:08:52,280 So I do think those need to be kept in there, 1151 01:08:52,280 --> 01:08:57,280 but I guess the way in which you are incorporating them into your review, 1152 01:08:57,280 --> 01:09:03,280 that can change, but I do think we need to keep those in there. 1153 01:09:03,280 --> 01:09:06,280 Can I ask a question, and that would be... 1154 01:09:06,280 --> 01:09:11,280 So, Kacen, what I'm hearing from you is you would like some sort of statement 1155 01:09:11,280 --> 01:09:16,280 in the DDC that basically acknowledges that the HLC has the authority 1156 01:09:16,280 --> 01:09:22,280 to adopt additional guidelines as it deems appropriate for evaluating... 1157 01:09:22,280 --> 01:09:25,280 As long as it doesn't conflict with the current code. 1158 01:09:25,280 --> 01:09:29,280 So if we need to get more into the minutiae of it that maybe the code can't do, 1159 01:09:29,280 --> 01:09:33,280 with a more flexible document that could be easily changed. 1160 01:09:33,280 --> 01:09:35,280 So that was my thought process, is that... 1161 01:09:35,280 --> 01:09:38,280 So you're looking for some sort of statement in the DDC that says the HLC 1162 01:09:38,280 --> 01:09:45,280 has the authority to adopt guidelines as it deems appropriate for evaluating X. 1163 01:09:45,280 --> 01:09:48,280 We can determine X, whether it's Certificates of Appropriateness, 1164 01:09:48,280 --> 01:09:51,280 the Tax Exemption Program, or any other program. 1165 01:09:51,280 --> 01:09:54,280 Demolition and designation. 1166 01:09:54,280 --> 01:09:57,280 Right, but at least it gives you that statement that says we can go in 1167 01:09:57,280 --> 01:09:59,280 and adopt these guidelines. 1168 01:09:59,280 --> 01:10:04,280 And then the group works on the guidelines for the particular topic, right? 1169 01:10:04,280 --> 01:10:07,280 And then we bring that back to the group for discussion to see, 1170 01:10:07,280 --> 01:10:12,280 okay, if these guidelines that we put together for evaluating this particular aspect, 1171 01:10:12,280 --> 01:10:15,280 if we feel like that meets our needs, great. 1172 01:10:15,280 --> 01:10:17,280 If not, make the adjustments we need to. 1173 01:10:17,280 --> 01:10:23,280 And if Marcella tells us it needs to go to council for formal adoption 1174 01:10:23,280 --> 01:10:26,280 by resolution versus ordinance, we can work that process. 1175 01:10:26,280 --> 01:10:29,280 But to me, that's, I think, what I'm hearing. 1176 01:10:29,280 --> 01:10:31,280 Is that a good summarization? 1177 01:10:31,280 --> 01:10:33,280 Yes, it absolutely is. 1178 01:10:33,280 --> 01:10:37,280 Now, if there's already something in here that I haven't seen that kind of does that already, 1179 01:10:37,280 --> 01:10:42,280 I'm just not real comfortable assuming that we have that power without seeing it. 1180 01:10:42,280 --> 01:10:45,280 Well, so that's something that Cameron and Marcella can take with them. 1181 01:10:45,280 --> 01:10:49,280 And so we can confirm, okay, does that language exist? 1182 01:10:49,280 --> 01:10:51,280 And Ron might need your assistance also. 1183 01:10:51,280 --> 01:10:54,280 But do we know if that language exists within the code? 1184 01:10:54,280 --> 01:10:57,280 If not, what would be some suggestions that we would add to the code 1185 01:10:57,280 --> 01:10:59,280 to be able to address that? 1186 01:10:59,280 --> 01:11:04,280 Including, you know, including if the code is not specific to evaluating requests 1187 01:11:04,280 --> 01:11:08,280 in accordance with the Secretary of Interior standards, pointing that out. 1188 01:11:08,280 --> 01:11:12,280 Or if there's any other regulatory guideline documents that we use for evaluation, 1189 01:11:12,280 --> 01:11:15,280 to me it's important to point those out. 1190 01:11:15,280 --> 01:11:20,280 But at least that's the starting point where we can confirm what's within our DDC or not. 1191 01:11:20,280 --> 01:11:26,280 Then we work on getting that statement or series of statements included in the code. 1192 01:11:26,280 --> 01:11:29,280 Ron's our expert on processing those. 1193 01:11:29,280 --> 01:11:34,280 But then to me it sounds really what the commission is needing is or finds beneficial is, 1194 01:11:34,280 --> 01:11:38,280 let's work on when we get a window request, 1195 01:11:38,280 --> 01:11:40,280 what are our guidelines for evaluating windows? 1196 01:11:40,280 --> 01:11:44,280 What is the commission deemed more appropriate versus not? 1197 01:11:44,280 --> 01:11:46,280 If we have another solar panel request come through, 1198 01:11:46,280 --> 01:11:49,280 what is the commission deemed as appropriate for a detonate 1199 01:11:49,280 --> 01:11:52,280 and being consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards? 1200 01:11:52,280 --> 01:11:56,280 If we get a request for replacing doors on properties or roofs, 1201 01:11:56,280 --> 01:12:01,280 you know, whatever those hot button items that we find are the ones that are more 1202 01:12:01,280 --> 01:12:05,280 of a struggle as we evaluate and we feel like we need some additional parameters to meet, 1203 01:12:05,280 --> 01:12:11,280 then I think it would be really good for the HLC to focus their efforts on those particular items. 1204 01:12:11,280 --> 01:12:15,280 If it's the tax exemption program, if we feel like that needs assistance, 1205 01:12:15,280 --> 01:12:17,280 then, you know, we can focus on that. 1206 01:12:17,280 --> 01:12:21,280 But it's to me, it's whatever the commission feels like are the more challenging items 1207 01:12:21,280 --> 01:12:26,280 where we need more guidance for evaluating it to maybe provide for some consistency 1208 01:12:26,280 --> 01:12:30,280 as commissioners roll off and new ones come on, 1209 01:12:30,280 --> 01:12:34,280 then I think, you know, you can create that framework document if you will. 1210 01:12:34,280 --> 01:12:41,280 So if that's what you're looking for, I think we break this down in smaller pieces and address it that way. 1211 01:12:41,280 --> 01:12:45,280 And if we run into an issue where it's like, oh, well, that's not intended consequence of this language, 1212 01:12:45,280 --> 01:12:49,280 it's something that we don't have to go to the City Council for, 1213 01:12:49,280 --> 01:12:56,280 well, we need to amend that, we've got an internal policy document that we can, you know, vote here and make changes to. 1214 01:12:56,280 --> 01:13:01,280 Tina, I just wanted to make it clear, if it's an internal document that the board is issuing for itself, 1215 01:13:01,280 --> 01:13:03,280 that doesn't have to go anywhere outside of this. 1216 01:13:03,280 --> 01:13:06,280 If it's anything that is supposed to be... 1217 01:13:06,280 --> 01:13:08,280 But do we need authority in order to make that? 1218 01:13:08,280 --> 01:13:12,280 So if you're not comfortable with your implied authority, then yes. 1219 01:13:12,280 --> 01:13:15,280 I was talking about this for a different issue, 1220 01:13:15,280 --> 01:13:23,280 but I think we're on board from the city attorney's office with boards and commissions who want to make position statements. 1221 01:13:23,280 --> 01:13:24,280 This is kind of a position statement. 1222 01:13:24,280 --> 01:13:28,280 Here's our position on windows, and here's what we do when we review windows. 1223 01:13:28,280 --> 01:13:35,280 If that's what we want to do, I think city attorney's office is comfortable that within the board's guidelines 1224 01:13:35,280 --> 01:13:39,280 from our boards and commissions handbook and also the powers under the DVC, 1225 01:13:39,280 --> 01:13:42,280 there is an ability for the board to do that. 1226 01:13:42,280 --> 01:13:49,280 It would be an internal document that wouldn't have any kind of force outside of just your internal review process. 1227 01:13:49,280 --> 01:13:56,280 But if that's the kind of document you're looking to create, then I think there is the ability to do so. 1228 01:13:56,280 --> 01:14:00,280 For an example, if you wanted to write a position paper on enforcement, 1229 01:14:00,280 --> 01:14:06,280 if you wanted to take this means we want to, you know, recommend enforcement, 1230 01:14:06,280 --> 01:14:08,280 or in this situation, we don't recommend enforcement, 1231 01:14:08,280 --> 01:14:14,280 I think that would be something that you as a body could do without additional direction. 1232 01:14:14,280 --> 01:14:16,280 We would share this with the public. 1233 01:14:16,280 --> 01:14:21,280 Oh, no, no, it would be, it can be shared publicly. It just wouldn't have any force. 1234 01:14:21,280 --> 01:14:26,280 Like it wouldn't be like an ordinance that you could point to and say you're violating this, so we're going to find it. 1235 01:14:26,280 --> 01:14:33,280 It would be a set of guidelines with consistent language in it that people would understand the different definitions, 1236 01:14:33,280 --> 01:14:37,280 and then we would have certain protocols for certain things that we see on a regular basis. 1237 01:14:37,280 --> 01:14:42,280 Maybe with the caveat that says for anything outside of these, 1238 01:14:42,280 --> 01:14:50,280 then it would go back to that grid or discussion and maybe inclusion later in that guideline. 1239 01:14:50,280 --> 01:14:53,280 I don't know if what we're talking about is that rigid. 1240 01:14:53,280 --> 01:14:58,280 I don't think we would have a if this then that equals approval. 1241 01:14:58,280 --> 01:15:02,280 How we would address windows, how we would address solar panels. 1242 01:15:02,280 --> 01:15:05,280 So is that going to be included in that guideline or no? 1243 01:15:05,280 --> 01:15:08,280 Yes, so that would be the document we're talking about. 1244 01:15:08,280 --> 01:15:14,280 But I don't know that I guess and maybe I'm misunderstanding what we wanted to do is I don't think we would be wanting to say 1245 01:15:14,280 --> 01:15:18,280 if you provide these things, you're like automatically approved. 1246 01:15:18,280 --> 01:15:22,280 I think there would still need to be discussion process. 1247 01:15:22,280 --> 01:15:26,280 It's kind of similar to how the Secretary of Interior standards is set up. 1248 01:15:26,280 --> 01:15:29,280 I mean, this HLC has looked at it, but basically they'll provide a scenario. 1249 01:15:29,280 --> 01:15:35,280 They'll say if you're looking at solar panels and then they'll recommend a list of things like, Cameron shared tonight, 1250 01:15:35,280 --> 01:15:38,280 things that are do's and things that are don'ts. 1251 01:15:38,280 --> 01:15:43,280 But it's not saying if you do all the do's, you're definitely going to get approved. 1252 01:15:43,280 --> 01:15:44,280 It's just saying. 1253 01:15:44,280 --> 01:15:48,280 Yes, that's basically what I was saying and then the language is for the definitions. 1254 01:15:48,280 --> 01:15:56,280 We've gone back and forth about what's, I forgot the terms we use. 1255 01:15:56,280 --> 01:16:00,280 Reconstruction versus improvement. 1256 01:16:00,280 --> 01:16:09,280 To have maybe something more detailed about what that could mean that not only the city council, 1257 01:16:09,280 --> 01:16:14,280 the person submitting the certificate in this committee would be on one page about them. 1258 01:16:14,280 --> 01:16:23,280 Right, which says that could be done in terms of if we were looking specifically in this instance for guidelines for the tax incentives, 1259 01:16:23,280 --> 01:16:29,280 those would need to be defined in those guidelines so that that serves as kind of that guiding light for the HLC, 1260 01:16:29,280 --> 01:16:32,280 as well as staff when they're doing that kind of review. 1261 01:16:32,280 --> 01:16:41,280 But then what staff would be held to in terms of the review would be specifically the code that's listed because that is law. 1262 01:16:41,280 --> 01:16:46,280 But those would be kind of to help you guide you all in those gray areas. 1263 01:16:46,280 --> 01:17:00,280 So, for instance, where we did have that gray area with solar panels, you know, staff provided their recommendation based off what's in the code and what's provided the secretary into your standards. 1264 01:17:00,280 --> 01:17:08,280 But then you also would have that kind of guideline of talking about different circumstances and we can talk about different examples. 1265 01:17:08,280 --> 01:17:20,280 So, but yeah, it would not be law. I think you guys are heading in the right direction. I've got a draft here of the proposed code amendments that a previous staff member put together. 1266 01:17:20,280 --> 01:17:30,280 And what he noted, what was noted is established guidelines to be used in determination of whether to grant or deny certificates of appropriateness for maintenance, 1267 01:17:30,280 --> 01:17:42,280 rehab, restoration, new construction and demolition. You can also add, you know, the tax incentives as well. So I think that's what we're going. 1268 01:17:42,280 --> 01:17:51,280 That's already the direction that you guys are going for. I think establishing that duty and responsibility in the development code is we can do. 1269 01:17:51,280 --> 01:17:56,280 And then the formulation or drafting of those guidelines would then fall out. 1270 01:17:56,280 --> 01:18:15,280 Yeah. The only thing that I would like to see if I wish list would be specific authority to further define undefined improvements. 1271 01:18:15,280 --> 01:18:27,280 If there's something that's specifically outlined in the code, allowing us to come up with our own definitions list for things that are left undefined by the code. 1272 01:18:27,280 --> 01:18:31,280 So those definitions be changes that would go into the DDC. 1273 01:18:31,280 --> 01:18:46,280 No, I'm thinking just another thing for our own guidelines and that way we can remain consistent across the board and be like, OK, when we say this, this is what it means. I just want to make clear for Ron's notes. How is that different from the language that Ron was proposing? 1274 01:18:46,280 --> 01:19:01,280 The guidelines can include definitions. I just want to make sure we're all on the same page. I assume if you have authority to make guidelines, you have authority to define that. 1275 01:19:01,280 --> 01:19:16,280 For purposes of evaluating X, improvement shall consider including but not limited to. And then you can give some examples, right? 1276 01:19:16,280 --> 01:19:31,280 And I purposely didn't come up with a specific example for that. Windows came to mind. 1277 01:19:31,280 --> 01:19:38,280 As you work on guidelines for evaluating, obviously anything that we can defer to that is defined or a common term would be most appropriate to use. 1278 01:19:38,280 --> 01:19:58,280 But if we're trying to provide some additional context, and I think that's where examples come into play, right? But to me, that's where this policy guideline document could really help benefit the commission in having it specific to certain items that you find challenging to review when making a decision. 1279 01:19:58,280 --> 01:20:09,280 I think it would also help the public that it's going to come forward, because I think it's really hard for people, for honest people that aren't just out for a quick buck, but people that live here to know. 1280 01:20:09,280 --> 01:20:17,280 Given, if you could just show an example of an application, I think some people have no clue what it should look like. 1281 01:20:17,280 --> 01:20:26,280 The biggest benefit is it will help staff from being like, well, is this going to get through? See how they feel. 1282 01:20:26,280 --> 01:20:32,280 Because with the guidelines being provided on the more challenging topics, it does hold you accountable. 1283 01:20:32,280 --> 01:20:49,280 So current commission, subsequent appointees to the commission, then if the commission finds that these guidelines are no longer working for the community and need to be reevaluated, then the commission has the ability to make those adjustments. 1284 01:20:49,280 --> 01:21:06,280 I think we have a conversation on a regular basis with city council sometimes on policies that they've adopted that guide some of the land use development that happens within the community, is that it is appropriate to review those policies from time to time to make sure that they're still relevant and appropriate for the community. 1285 01:21:06,280 --> 01:21:28,280 So just like any guideline documents that the HLC would establish for itself, that it is appropriate to review it from time to time, because especially in some of the requests that you all see, let's face it, new materials can be introduced on a regular basis that might be determined to be appropriate to be used for historic properties or possibly not appropriate. 1286 01:21:28,280 --> 01:21:38,280 And so being able to update those documents accordingly to be able to address their changes in technology would be important to keep current. 1287 01:21:38,280 --> 01:21:44,280 Now, Hardy board didn't used to be appropriate. 1288 01:21:44,280 --> 01:22:07,280 And just the point of clarification, the partial tax incentive that's in the code of ordinances. So, if there is definitions there that means clarification, I think that's what the council directed initially, that needs to be prepared in a different way and codified because that's part of the code of ordinances. 1289 01:22:07,280 --> 01:22:15,280 And I think what it was in that if I remember right in Lansing case and you'll keep me honest here, but I think it was the term improvement. 1290 01:22:15,280 --> 01:22:38,280 Because the term improvement in the code is very broad. 1291 01:22:38,280 --> 01:22:48,280 Other panels and not for debate, I'm using it for an example. That doesn't fit rehabilitation that doesn't fit any of that, but it's an improvement. 1292 01:22:48,280 --> 01:22:58,280 So that's why to me that term was so broad on that tax incentive there. 1293 01:22:58,280 --> 01:23:08,280 We'll look at the code ordinances to and see what definitions because there's a, you know, there's a definition section. 1294 01:23:08,280 --> 01:23:24,280 What is the Secretary of Interior to the average person? Are they really going to look these up? But if we, if it's ours and we present them, here are our guidelines, you know, maybe we can. 1295 01:23:24,280 --> 01:23:33,280 We're not trading for the property owner to come in and not know. Sure. Sure. 1296 01:23:33,280 --> 01:23:43,280 So are there any other things on? I think we were looking at 2.2. I only have a question and I guess it was composition. There used to be a composition limit. 1297 01:23:43,280 --> 01:23:57,280 A run of composition of the board. It was like, you had a story. You had an audit is that still there? I just didn't. So that's actually in the code of ordinances and it was removed at the direction. 1298 01:23:57,280 --> 01:24:07,280 Actually, in just to kind of add on that, I'm looking at it right now because I remember there was some language in here. So I was looking to see if your magic language was the most portion. 1299 01:24:07,280 --> 01:24:18,280 But we made it consistent with the state CLG program. Yeah. That's what we brought with it. So it doesn't reference the accountant anymore. 1300 01:24:18,280 --> 01:24:30,280 Right. Yeah, there were some weird, there were these weird. Yeah, it doesn't do that layout anymore. And specifically within the DDC, we just changed it to four members, presidential, constitutional, quorum for the transaction of business. 1301 01:24:30,280 --> 01:24:44,280 It's on here for one meeting. We take out the account. I guess my only concern is that somebody should live in the neighborhood in a historic district. There at least should be one representative. I don't see. I didn't know if that state or went away. 1302 01:24:44,280 --> 01:24:54,280 That is not a requirement of the certified local government. Yeah. For a historic commission, I think at least one person should live here. I really, I mean, how is that changeable? 1303 01:24:54,280 --> 01:25:05,280 That's a city council. And that actually that was approved by you all as the HLC and went through on March 22nd of this year. 1304 01:25:05,280 --> 01:25:22,280 Right. So what we have in the ordinance right now is the list of members whose qualifications or professions are architecture, history, architectural history, planning, prehistoric and historic archeology, folklore, cultural anthropology, curation, conservation, or landscape architecture. 1305 01:25:22,280 --> 01:25:27,280 So there are still parameters provided and it's consistent with the certified local government program. 1306 01:25:27,280 --> 01:25:40,280 Correct. I don't recall us taking off someone living in a historic district. I don't either because that is something I think is important. Yeah, me too. And I recall taking something off of there, but that's not what I recall. 1307 01:25:40,280 --> 01:25:52,280 Did you say that it's their profession or did they have a background? What was the beginning of that? List of membership qualifications or professions are. Okay. Yes. I don't remember us taking off a resident. 1308 01:25:52,280 --> 01:26:03,280 So let me just say that it was a recommendation to council is ultimately city council's decision and this was the direction they went. So I think if we want to discuss this further, we'll need to put on the matrix to discuss. 1309 01:26:03,280 --> 01:26:16,280 That's part of this whole thing. So I'm just saying that I was like, a little more. I think we see this mission going off the matrix. Yes. 1310 01:26:16,280 --> 01:26:26,280 So there was one other thing I think it was related on. Is there anything else related to a two eighty one zero eight one a. 1311 01:26:26,280 --> 01:26:40,280 I would say does the subcommittee feel like they have some direction to move forward and to start making adjustments or this just complicated a little bit more and add more to your plate or how's everyone feeling? 1312 01:26:40,280 --> 01:26:57,280 Are we going to wait for council or are we going to go ahead and get cranking on the guidelines? What do we think we could have one ready that way? I mean, I mean, it's arguable that we can do it now. I mean, that's just kind of makes a little more implicit. 1313 01:26:57,280 --> 01:27:10,280 Could I offer suggestions so we can and I know Marcel has already advised that is the legal team's position that that you already have the ability to be able to develop guideline documents. 1314 01:27:10,280 --> 01:27:22,280 We can as part of working on futures code amendments, we can work on adding this concrete statement. I think Ron ran through a red line version. We can provide that to the committee. 1315 01:27:22,280 --> 01:27:31,280 We can make a look at it. You want to make formal recommendations for the commission as a whole to say, yes, we agree, disagree. We could bring that back as a separate item, Cameron. 1316 01:27:31,280 --> 01:27:43,280 But to me, then it sounds like probably the lion's share of the work that is going to be to identify those topics in which the commission feels that having some guidelines provide whatever those topics might be. 1317 01:27:43,280 --> 01:28:12,280 Right? So to me, I think if the commission, the subcommittee may have already identified a list of items that would be guidelines on, or maybe we bring that back at another meeting and have that conversation about what are some of the applications that have been really challenging for the commission to work through where it would have been nice to have some sort of guidelines and maybe have that discussion then to give you an opportunity to call through your memory banks and identifying some of those projects. 1318 01:28:12,280 --> 01:28:35,280 That's spot on what I was thinking. If we could have a top three, at least on the big, like you said, the largest challenges that we've had that are a place to start. And I know that council was, the reason we even started was because of the tax issue and diving into that, that was just way more. 1319 01:28:35,280 --> 01:28:43,280 Just way more. But it's hard when you don't have the guidelines to go by. 1320 01:28:43,280 --> 01:28:52,280 Go ahead, I'm sorry. No, no, no. I was thinking maybe for the work matrix, maybe for next time we could, you know, ask everyone what topics. 1321 01:28:52,280 --> 01:29:08,280 Well, I mean, I don't know if this is outside of our topic, but I was just thinking for guidelines that immediately come to mind are, you know, do we want to somehow say, at least take a closer look at windows, paint, and roofs, because I feel like that's going to probably 1322 01:29:08,280 --> 01:29:24,280 turn about 75% of the difficulty with we want to keep you busy for what you guys want to hear. 1323 01:29:24,280 --> 01:29:43,280 Just to also inform the commission, there are three districts, there are three historic districts, and they have each different requirements or standards. So once we develop these guidelines, we just have to be, you have to understand that there are different standards for those particular districts as well. 1324 01:29:43,280 --> 01:30:03,280 Thanks, Ron. 1325 01:30:03,280 --> 01:30:20,280 Okay, so it sounds like the items we'll bring back for a future meeting are reviewing the redline language that Ron had shared. I guess you all can decide, maybe give some direction, Mary, if it works for you, whether or not that just goes to the ad hoc committee first or if you want that brought back to the group as a whole. 1326 01:30:20,280 --> 01:30:31,280 And then the second item was developing that list of items that need, that the committee will need guidance on where to start focusing that effort. So to me it sounds like that one needs to come back to the group as a whole. 1327 01:30:31,280 --> 01:30:43,280 Or just make a list, make lists. 1328 01:30:43,280 --> 01:30:54,280 So are we ready to move on to HLC 22-082A, which is discuss and suggest eligible historic properties from a local historic landmark designation. 1329 01:30:54,280 --> 01:30:56,280 And that was where my list got very long. 1330 01:30:56,280 --> 01:31:10,280 Okay, so I believe we discussed this back in September 12, 2022. So I shown this to you all 1331 01:31:10,280 --> 01:31:24,280 back at that time at that meeting. And one of the things as the Historic Landmark Commission is you all have the ability to recommend to Planning and Zoning Commission properties that can be up for designation, 1332 01:31:24,280 --> 01:31:48,280 whether it's a landmark or even a historic district. So, similar to our matrix, one of the things that staff has now included is to have a reoccurring agenda item where you all come forward as individual commissioners or you can come as, you know, a group of two or what not. 1333 01:31:48,280 --> 01:32:03,280 And you bring forth properties that you feel should be designated within Den, or areas that you feel should be either a historic district or conservation overlay. 1334 01:32:03,280 --> 01:32:20,280 So this would be kind of the guiding light for you all. And in addition to this survey, we also additionally have the 1996, 2012, and 2015 surveys, which were included as exhibits, but those are online as well. 1335 01:32:20,280 --> 01:32:31,280 But these are all those properties within those past surveys from the last 30 plus years that were considered to be eligible properties worthy of designation within Den. 1336 01:32:31,280 --> 01:32:40,280 So as you can see, we have thousands of properties that could be designated, we're just not doing that at the moment. 1337 01:32:40,280 --> 01:32:56,280 So I thought if we had a reoccurring item where you all have the opportunity to get out there and see what properties that you feel that matter to you, or maybe to your communities, maybe it's your neighborhood in that instance, 1338 01:32:56,280 --> 01:33:11,280 that you feel should be designated, this would be not only something that is reflective of your powers and duties within the DDC, but is also part of the preservation plan that was implemented in 2019. 1339 01:33:11,280 --> 01:33:28,280 So obviously you all might not have anything that you're bringing forth this meeting, but as I said, it will be a reoccurring agenda item. We do have this resource and I'm happy to send this out, or we can include that in Monica's email every time that she sends out the agenda package 1340 01:33:28,280 --> 01:33:42,280 and just say, "Hey, reminder, here's your online resource." And you can also find those online as well under the historic preservation page, but just to provide you kind of that breakdown of what that will look like, if you all have watched city council, 1341 01:33:42,280 --> 01:33:55,280 they have their two minute pitches that they bring forward in terms of something that the council will cover at a later meeting, or that staff might be allowed to dedicate time to. 1342 01:33:55,280 --> 01:34:10,280 So just to kind of provide that breakdown, it'd be a similar breakdown, but the commissioners will have the opportunity to bring forward one to two properties from the Denton Historic Resource Survey map to discuss and vote on. 1343 01:34:10,280 --> 01:34:19,280 A commissioner proposing a property for local designation consideration will have a maximum of two minutes to justify the need for designation of the property. 1344 01:34:19,280 --> 01:34:35,280 Remaining commissioners will each have a maximum of one minute each to provide feedback and indicate their support for the designation, and after that each proposed property will need a minimum of four commissioner votes, which is four of them, to pursue designation of that property. 1345 01:34:35,280 --> 01:34:55,280 At that time, if a property does receive four or more votes, I will add that to an active designation list. So that list will just keep growing over the year, and that will kind of meet also what's said in the preservation plans of terms of the HLC keeping an annual list of properties that should be designated. 1346 01:34:55,280 --> 01:35:07,280 So this will be kind of that preliminary list that you all start to create, but also in terms of what we're, we've kind of talked in past meetings in terms of we're seeing a lot more demolitions coming forward and everything. 1347 01:35:07,280 --> 01:35:29,280 This will show that we're making an active, the commission's making an active go at potentially having these properties designated in the future and having, starting to have this conversation with the property owner to see if they have interest, and maybe that's, you know, kind of where we go into that sub chapter two and kind of maybe work on the incentives and all that kind of thing. 1348 01:35:29,280 --> 01:35:38,280 But don't want to get off topic, but just kind of, this is what this item will be. And as stated, it'll be similar to the matrix. So I just want to provide that. 1349 01:35:38,280 --> 01:35:40,280 I have a question. 1350 01:35:40,280 --> 01:36:01,280 So, there's a lot of beautiful buildings that are UNT, TWU. Do we have any jurisdiction there? So we can speak with UNT. We can have those conversations, but we can't just bring them up. 1351 01:36:01,280 --> 01:36:14,280 I would say, I don't know if we'll have them, but we don't have that authority just to say. So, I mean, they're within our city, but they would still have to have that sign off in terms of the owner sign off. 1352 01:36:14,280 --> 01:36:27,280 But yes, so we could designate those properties at the local level. I believe, I don't think that we, I would say, I don't know. 1353 01:36:27,280 --> 01:36:49,280 Okay, so we might need to look into that a little bit more because those are universities, but from my understanding, if they are willing to have those discussions with you all as the commission and say, you know what, we think that's a great idea. 1354 01:36:49,280 --> 01:36:57,280 They might be leaning more towards the national and state because they get more tax incentives there. 1355 01:36:57,280 --> 01:37:22,280 I'm sorry, they don't get taxes. They used to. They did. They did just remove public universities from that. So, not incorrect, but they did just change that this year. So, those were removed, but that's a discussion I think we can have. And we do have that authority. We do have that opportunity to have those discussions. But whether or not UNT and TWU would be willing to sign off on that is, we'll see. 1356 01:37:22,280 --> 01:37:27,280 Okay, I can say no, just generally. 1357 01:37:27,280 --> 01:37:30,280 On behalf of UNT, you said. 1358 01:37:30,280 --> 01:37:39,280 It raises an interesting point because normally from a land development zoning side of things, we cannot regulate the universities. 1359 01:37:39,280 --> 01:37:59,280 Because they're an entity of the state. So, a local government typically cannot regulate the state level. We get our powers from the state, right? So, but if there are some opportunities through historic preservation program and like Cameron said, it could be just, you know, they may be willing to do that on their own. 1360 01:37:59,280 --> 01:38:01,280 Good press, perhaps. 1361 01:38:01,280 --> 01:38:09,280 But I think that definitely under Marcella said she'd look into it. So, I'd be curious if there's anything under. 1362 01:38:09,280 --> 01:38:14,280 Brother, I've never come across anything in relation to that. 1363 01:38:14,280 --> 01:38:25,280 Because I've seen other universities do it, but it might have been because they were a private university versus a public university. So, we'll do some more research. We can come and bring that back. 1364 01:38:25,280 --> 01:38:39,280 Interesting. One past president of UNT famously said, I have no responsibility to that neighborhood that he was ruining at all. 1365 01:38:39,280 --> 01:38:53,280 My responsibility is solely to the Board of Trustees and Board of Regents and the school and to the legislature. 1366 01:38:53,280 --> 01:39:01,280 And it didn't include dent and saying anything. 1367 01:39:01,280 --> 01:39:04,280 I think your phrase that better. 1368 01:39:04,280 --> 01:39:22,280 I have only one comment related to this. I think that since the landowner has to agree to this, I would at least like to make a suggestion that our working group consider this when you talk about the word improvement because if it's not an advantage to a homeowner, businesses get a lot more benefits, and the homeowner is going to say, 1369 01:39:22,280 --> 01:39:42,280 you know, I don't care. So, if there's nothing there, I think it's going to be very hard to convince people to move on. And so, this argument about improvements, which is where you guys started, is a real concern in my book. If people see no benefit, they don't want to do it. In fact, they only see it as an impairment to their ability to improve anything. 1370 01:39:42,280 --> 01:39:55,280 So, please, let's be a little generous there. The only other question I have, Cameron, is there a way to put a distinction on the GIS map the city has so that it just pops up that it's a historic thing, instead of having to go look at the tax rolls of everything? 1371 01:39:55,280 --> 01:39:59,280 So, these are all highlighted as being the eligible properties. 1372 01:39:59,280 --> 01:40:04,280 No, but on GIS, for the city GIS. When you go to DentonCad.com. 1373 01:40:04,280 --> 01:40:15,280 We don't have these specifically listed. We do have our local historic districts and local landmarks. It doesn't pop up in each house? Correct. No, it does not pop up in each house. 1374 01:40:15,280 --> 01:40:32,280 That would be kind of cool because then when you go to kind of look around and go, wow, all these houses in this neighborhood have been historic. Right. Yeah, that's why we have to have the different GIS maps because I'm assuming there's only to a certain degree that we can have so much GIS data in one map. 1375 01:40:32,280 --> 01:40:43,280 So, we do have the historic resource survey one and then we also have our Denton landmarks map as well on the historic preservation page. 1376 01:40:43,280 --> 01:40:58,280 But these all highlighted are the eligible properties. So, that's already been chosen for you. It's just you going out to the site and saying, hey, is that integrity still intact? Do I think it's worthy? 1377 01:40:58,280 --> 01:41:03,280 How far back is it the age of the property or is it the age of the community around it? 1378 01:41:03,280 --> 01:41:15,280 So, when these surveys were completed, these were taken into the context of the National Register, so the Secretary of the Interior's standards. 1379 01:41:15,280 --> 01:41:23,280 So, they first were looking at, okay, is it over 50 years old? Yes. Then they were going into the different criteria of the National Register. 1380 01:41:23,280 --> 01:41:32,280 So, the first survey on here is from 1996 and then our 2012 Bolivar and then Idiot's Hill, which was 2015. 1381 01:41:32,280 --> 01:41:42,280 So, they all, their baseline is that 50 years and then from there they start to break it down into criteria in terms of, does it have historic significance? 1382 01:41:42,280 --> 01:42:00,280 Was there someone of importance who lived there or is the architectural integrity still intact? So, that's kind of where they break it down into those different categories from the National Register to determine whether it's eligible or not. 1383 01:42:00,280 --> 01:42:03,280 I don't think I've heard anybody call it Idiot's Hill in a long time. 1384 01:42:03,280 --> 01:42:13,280 Well, I've heard it a lot. Oh good, that's good. I think it would be exciting to get some new houses on. 1385 01:42:13,280 --> 01:42:17,280 Has anybody approached the city about wanting to become beyond? 1386 01:42:17,280 --> 01:42:29,280 I've been approached twice and probably the biggest factor that it came down to is that they didn't feel like the tax incentives were really there. 1387 01:42:29,280 --> 01:42:37,280 And they didn't feel that to be regulated to the extent that they would be, that they were being compensated. 1388 01:42:37,280 --> 01:42:45,280 But they did want to restore their properties to, you know, a historic period. 1389 01:42:45,280 --> 01:42:51,280 So, a lot of those people who came to me, the next direction I steered them in was state and federal. 1390 01:42:51,280 --> 01:43:03,280 So, all those people are now looking at getting both state and national. But the thing is it's not as much regulation at the state and the national as local. 1391 01:43:03,280 --> 01:43:08,280 So, or I guess as much as image teeth per se. 1392 01:43:08,280 --> 01:43:15,280 But the benefits are at least for businesses are much, much better for state or national. State and national. 1393 01:43:15,280 --> 01:43:21,280 Yeah, we don't have enough. Yeah, we don't because for state and national, those are for income producing properties. 1394 01:43:21,280 --> 01:43:29,280 And so, some of these property owners, they were talking about, oh, well, I might do that and become a rental property due to the incentives. 1395 01:43:29,280 --> 01:43:42,280 But they were like asking me at the local level what we had first to offer. And I presented to them and they just said, oh, that's not really what I was looking for to do all this kind of maintenance. 1396 01:43:42,280 --> 01:43:48,280 I mean, I almost want to say that as a commission, we have to think about what we can, what the city can offer. 1397 01:43:48,280 --> 01:43:53,280 Correct. So, that's something that we can discuss and, you know, put on the matrix or something that we can be discussed. 1398 01:43:53,280 --> 01:44:03,280 Because we had discussed a little bit in the subcommittee as well our discussions, but that's something that we can start to also kind of think about what are some better incentives. 1399 01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:19,280 But, yeah, I think it's worthy because I do have a lot of, I've had members of the public come and ask me, if I do this, what are my, I guess, my perks and I present what I present. 1400 01:44:19,280 --> 01:44:34,280 Is it possible to give us advice on what other cities do? Yes. Could you come back with that? I would like to know what McKinney might do because they have a pretty nice historic district and Grapevine has a very nice one. 1401 01:44:34,280 --> 01:44:43,280 What can we do? Because they seem to be very attractive to people. I mean, even Fort Worth, the people love the historic area. So, what do other cities do? 1402 01:44:43,280 --> 01:44:54,280 In terms of compensation? Yes, in terms of compensation because it actually builds business if you look at all of these areas where they've saved all the homes. 1403 01:44:54,280 --> 01:44:59,280 It's very big in the business area. Very, very, you know, people spend a lot of money downtown. 1404 01:44:59,280 --> 01:45:14,280 I think maybe if we can direct back to questions about the new process for designation. Yeah. In addition to my question about the universities. 1405 01:45:14,280 --> 01:45:25,280 So does this show if a university owns a structure? And I don't mean just on their campus. Oh, I see where you're going with that. 1406 01:45:25,280 --> 01:45:36,280 Oh, in terms. Oh, if they own it in terms of who's the ownership and what you would find on DeKalb. Does it show? No, we do not have that. 1407 01:45:36,280 --> 01:45:46,280 But you have a neighbor that is owned by CWU. I do that. I'm just wondering about some other structures. 1408 01:45:46,280 --> 01:45:55,280 I'm sure we can pull probably the data. And that's why I just wonder, because there's some that I think are gorgeous that are close to a campus. 1409 01:45:55,280 --> 01:46:02,280 And I wonder in my mind, I'm thinking back in the day, it was used for this. I can think of all kinds of stories, you know. 1410 01:46:02,280 --> 01:46:16,280 So that's what I was going to say. That's something I actually I'll talk to our GIS and see if we can connect it to DeKalb just because I think that would be helpful even just for staff and any everyday user who might want to use it. 1411 01:46:16,280 --> 01:46:25,280 But thank you for that. I'll take that to GIS. 1412 01:46:25,280 --> 01:46:35,280 I'm sorry. I'm just making notes to myself. All right. So any more discussion on 082A? 1413 01:46:35,280 --> 01:46:50,280 Okay, we have a little bit more. HLC 22-093 Discussion Determine Opportunities for Public Outreach and Education by Historic Landmark Commission. 1414 01:46:50,280 --> 01:47:03,280 And so I mean, I guess when I saw this, I wasn't sure whether you meant for just educating the general population or the people that are already in the historic district, you know, sort of outreach to like anything from elementary schools. 1415 01:47:03,280 --> 01:47:16,280 It's whatever you all want it to be. It's very broad. It's more of just because we've had those discussions and it's been brought up in past meetings that the HLC wants to put more of a, 1416 01:47:16,280 --> 01:47:30,280 I guess, a face to a name and kind of get more outreach and educate not only realtors could be discussed in the past, educating realtors in the area, whether or not they have a historic property. 1417 01:47:30,280 --> 01:47:53,280 We've talked about, you know, talking to contractors potentially. So this could be something it's really in terms of, for instance, preservation month. You know, that is in the midst of kind of in the preliminary stages of coming back for a second annual in May 2020. 1418 01:47:53,280 --> 01:48:09,280 Yeah, you know, that is something that maybe you all as a commission want to participate in. You had talked about block parties in the past and having a block party where you guys get the community together, but also, you know, celebrate preservation, talk about preservation. 1419 01:48:09,280 --> 01:48:24,280 So this really is kind of that larger discussion of how do you all want to do that public outreach staff right now currently has, you know, the preserved and Instagram. 1420 01:48:24,280 --> 01:48:31,280 You know, I'm going out to different functions and talking about 1421 01:48:31,280 --> 01:48:47,280 Historic Preservation in Denton, doing speaking sessions, interviews. So that's, for instance, I guess, two weeks ago regarding the UNT journalism student who had interest in talking to an HLC member. 1422 01:48:47,280 --> 01:49:03,280 I don't know if anyone volunteered for that, but that was an opportunity to kind of put, you know, once again, a face to a name of who's on the commission. What does the commission do? What is your role? Why is of importance to the community? 1423 01:49:03,280 --> 01:49:18,280 In terms of preserving a sense of place as well as observing Denton's historic structures and built environment. So those kind of opportunities that you all have as a commission and, you know, we don't have to hash it all out tonight. 1424 01:49:18,280 --> 01:49:30,280 I know it's been a long meeting so far, but kind of just getting kind of those preliminary ideas. But I did want to mention that Preservation Month 2023 is going to come back for me. 1425 01:49:30,280 --> 01:49:34,280 I would suggest putting this in the matrix for next time. 1426 01:49:34,280 --> 01:49:42,280 I kind of agree. 1427 01:49:42,280 --> 01:49:49,280 So then, okay, so we have two or three different things that we want to add to the matrix, but we'll bring it back. 1428 01:49:49,280 --> 01:50:01,280 Exactly. So then, Mary, do you want to move on? Yes. Now we'll move on to item D, which is HLC 22-094. Hold the discussion. We're currently in the Historic Landmark Commission project matrix. 1429 01:50:01,280 --> 01:50:23,280 So we have the initial one for public outreach and education, which was brought on the agenda, but maybe it's kind of a recurring item similar to our designation. 1430 01:50:23,280 --> 01:50:40,280 But additionally, we have discussion about the potential for window standards. I don't know if we want to keep that on there based off the kind of guideline discussion we just had so that if you all want to remove that, you all just need to have a minimum of four votes. 1431 01:50:40,280 --> 01:50:55,280 We have that quorum number, minimum of four votes to remove that. Additionally, just wanted to note that you will see some changes. Staff is now going to have a section under the matrix, items for Historic Landmark Commission consideration. 1432 01:50:55,280 --> 01:51:09,280 We do actually have a number of items that are in consideration right now. This is something, as you can see from the HPO from staff, a walking tour of historic districts and landmarks to review current property maintenance. 1433 01:51:09,280 --> 01:51:23,280 A mixer with Denton County Historical Commission. So this would be kind of to see what the County Commission is working on. What are kind of, they do a lot of public outreach, kind of just seeing, you know, are they working on markers or anything like that. 1434 01:51:23,280 --> 01:51:32,280 And maybe you all can share some ideas or things that you've learned about over the last year being on the commission. 1435 01:51:32,280 --> 01:51:46,280 Vice Chair Anderson brought forward on 9/26 the regulation of fencing in all local historic districts. So that's another item for consideration. Additionally, discussion of potential updates to the demolition code of historic properties. 1436 01:51:46,280 --> 01:52:00,280 So that is something that's being discussed amongst other cities in Texas in terms of putting a more stringent, I guess, demolition code forward in terms of eligible historic properties. 1437 01:52:00,280 --> 01:52:09,280 So in terms of that map, say we're looking at that map and there's a property that is eligible that is going to be, has come in for a demolition permit. 1438 01:52:09,280 --> 01:52:22,280 You all as the HLC would have the authority to put a stop work order on that for 60, 30 days, 60 days, whatever it may be until you have a chance to review it as a commission. 1439 01:52:22,280 --> 01:52:34,280 That is something that was just implemented in San Marcos. I've talked to that HPO and some other cities are trying to kind of see how that would work. But that's something I wanted to bring forward. 1440 01:52:34,280 --> 01:52:49,280 Additionally, discussion about an HLC event during Preservation Month 2023. And then lastly, discuss enforcement action and give recommendation for HPO to work with city prosecutor, which we discussed in that special call meeting from November 2. 1441 01:52:49,280 --> 01:52:57,280 So just want to let you all know that that's kind of that's going to be kind of the considerations breakdown now on the matrix. 1442 01:52:57,280 --> 01:53:13,280 And then additionally, we are going to have an annual update from myself as staff where I just provide annual updates of what I've been working on, such as, you know, whether it be marketing, social media, different things. 1443 01:53:13,280 --> 01:53:21,280 Maybe I've gone out and done some speaking sessions or I've worked on some policies and ordinances, but that's where I'll provide that annual update. 1444 01:53:21,280 --> 01:53:31,280 So just want to run through that. But I will take you all back to I just wonder whether we want to remove two of these since you guys are working so much on standards. 1445 01:53:31,280 --> 01:53:45,280 Well, see, I was thinking about moving into the consideration section because that seems less of an action item and more of a this is something we need to be thinking about keeping in our minds unless I'm understanding. 1446 01:53:45,280 --> 01:53:52,280 So the Historic Landmark Commission consideration, these would be items that we put under request and that we would bring forward to in a future. 1447 01:53:52,280 --> 01:53:56,280 Okay, so it's just a future request. Yes, yes. 1448 01:53:56,280 --> 01:54:05,280 Because I think like the fencing thing is actually under what you guys are talking about. And as far as standards, it would be on my list, right? Fencing. 1449 01:54:05,280 --> 01:54:23,280 Right. Yeah. So if we want to discuss about those two other items that we had discussed back in or I guess on item 3B, which was the eligible historic properties, as well as 3C, which was public outreach and education. 1450 01:54:23,280 --> 01:54:33,280 So I guess if you see anything that you all feel like needs to be removed, then we just need a minimum of four commissioner votes to remove it from the matrix. 1451 01:54:33,280 --> 01:54:47,280 But if there's items that you all want to add in terms of requests or consideration, then we need to have the minimum of four votes. 1452 01:54:47,280 --> 01:54:56,280 Or if there's anything that you need, you want to move from consideration up to request. I'm kind of thinking the windows can be removed since it is a subcommittee working on that. 1453 01:54:56,280 --> 01:55:02,280 And can we add to that the fencing so that you guys would be able to have that on there in a sense? 1454 01:55:02,280 --> 01:55:09,280 Well that, I was going to say that was something that you all discussed maybe having as a future agenda item that people bring back their topics. 1455 01:55:09,280 --> 01:55:22,280 So if you all want to bring that back as a request for a future agenda item, then we need you all, someone to present that and give me the statement so I can write that down and then we need the four votes. 1456 01:55:22,280 --> 01:55:40,280 I would request that we do what you just said, that we maintain a list of items that we want to consider if we got one. 1457 01:55:40,280 --> 01:55:41,280 That was easy. 1458 01:55:41,280 --> 01:55:44,280 We had a wave going. 1459 01:55:44,280 --> 01:55:45,280 We'll start over there. 1460 01:55:45,280 --> 01:55:51,280 Who's paying attention? 1461 01:55:51,280 --> 01:56:03,280 Lance, I just want to clarify, did you want the window and the fence item moved under that discussion or do you want to leave those on the agenda? 1462 01:56:03,280 --> 01:56:08,280 I think we should move them under that discussion. You're my recommendation. 1463 01:56:08,280 --> 01:56:21,280 Okay. 1464 01:56:21,280 --> 01:56:26,280 Is there, we had two other items that were kind of being discussed during? 1465 01:56:26,280 --> 01:56:38,280 Well, I have one about the composition of HLC to add to this because certified local governments are fine. HLC is a historic landmark commission. 1466 01:56:38,280 --> 01:56:54,280 I think some representative from a historic district should certainly be on the commission since they intimately understand the charms and the costs of living there. 1467 01:56:54,280 --> 01:56:56,280 I agree. 1468 01:56:56,280 --> 01:56:58,280 And the benefits. 1469 01:56:58,280 --> 01:57:00,280 We'll stop for a discussion right now. That's something to put at the top, right? 1470 01:57:00,280 --> 01:57:03,280 Right, yeah. So this would be put as a request for a later decision. 1471 01:57:03,280 --> 01:57:07,280 No, it would be a request to make a recommendation to city council because it would have to go before city council. 1472 01:57:07,280 --> 01:57:10,280 Yes, it has to go before city council. 1473 01:57:10,280 --> 01:57:17,280 I think we were talking to add on the matrix under the process for designation. I mean, what benefits? Oh, sorry. 1474 01:57:17,280 --> 01:57:18,280 Sorry, we need a vote on that. 1475 01:57:18,280 --> 01:57:20,280 Oh, we have to vote on that. Okay. 1476 01:57:20,280 --> 01:57:23,280 Yeah, we have two people. 1477 01:57:23,280 --> 01:57:25,280 Sorry, there's a lot going on. 1478 01:57:25,280 --> 01:57:27,280 Well, it's getting tight. It's getting late. 1479 01:57:27,280 --> 01:57:30,280 Yeah. 1480 01:57:30,280 --> 01:57:33,280 Okay, so are we done on that one? We got it. Do you have that camera? 1481 01:57:33,280 --> 01:57:38,280 Yes, yes, I do. Sorry. My brain is finally wearing out. 1482 01:57:38,280 --> 01:57:50,280 We talked about a new process for designation of what benefits there are to the homeowner. It kind of was related to, you know, improvements and why should we have any more historic properties? 1483 01:57:50,280 --> 01:58:01,280 So it was sort of something, I don't know whether you want to call it educational or under you guys talking about incentive, the incentive part you were talking about. I wasn't sure where it would wind up. 1484 01:58:01,280 --> 01:58:06,280 But how can we get more people to come if we have nothing, if there's no benefit to them? 1485 01:58:06,280 --> 01:58:10,280 So a discussion regarding incentives for historic property owners. 1486 01:58:10,280 --> 01:58:21,280 Right, and mainly homeowners because commercial entities have a much bigger, you know, place to go than us. 1487 01:58:21,280 --> 01:58:27,280 So do you want to include information from other similar situations? 1488 01:58:27,280 --> 01:58:40,280 Yes, from other areas around the state. What do they do, like New Brunsworth or San Marcos or Grapevine or McKinney, San Antonio? 1489 01:58:40,280 --> 01:58:46,280 Vote to have that added to their list. 1490 01:58:46,280 --> 01:58:55,280 I have one other, but it's mainly I think to encourage just, I think it may be under education. 1491 01:58:55,280 --> 01:59:08,280 The part on education was that I don't know that every business owner actually appreciates how much benefit they can get from having a city that has a lot of historic buildings. 1492 01:59:08,280 --> 01:59:27,280 So the same cities that we just rattled off, it would be behooving them to know not just personally can they get a tax deduction, but how much business does it bring into other cities like Grapevine has the wine fest, people are charmed by it, McKinney has both the old days and McKinney have something like that. 1493 01:59:27,280 --> 01:59:29,280 So you're looking for the economic development. 1494 01:59:29,280 --> 01:59:38,280 Yeah, how much does it bring to the city to have a historic district? So that would help increase the quantify it. 1495 01:59:38,280 --> 01:59:44,280 I know that's hard or something, but I think it could have a real benefit. 1496 01:59:44,280 --> 01:59:48,280 So he's a palooza. 1497 01:59:48,280 --> 01:59:50,280 I'm done. I promise I'm done. 1498 01:59:50,280 --> 01:59:52,280 Did you guys want to vote on that one? Yeah. 1499 01:59:52,280 --> 02:00:10,280 Okay. And then just real quick before we move on, sorry, before we close, did you all want to have put on there a discussion about education and outreach since we didn't really discuss that tonight, but we said that we want people to bring ideas. 1500 02:00:10,280 --> 02:00:23,280 Do we need to, do you all want to add that as a request saying bring at a future meeting ideas for Historic Landmark Commission specifically? Yes. Okay, Republic Outreach. 1501 02:00:23,280 --> 02:00:29,280 As Cameron said, yes. 1502 02:00:29,280 --> 02:00:35,280 So that was for us to talk about tonight, but no one, we didn't have anything, I think we've reached the end. 1503 02:00:35,280 --> 02:00:40,280 It's like 738 and I'm a little gaga. Yeah. Okay. 1504 02:00:40,280 --> 02:00:44,280 Is there anything else that we want to add? 1505 02:00:44,280 --> 02:00:50,280 No. All right. Well, given that we have completed this, I don't have much of a point. 1506 02:00:50,280 --> 02:00:59,280 And I'll make the motion after I ask the question. When did Roy go in the hospital and what do we all know? 1507 02:00:59,280 --> 02:01:01,280 Monica? 1508 02:01:01,280 --> 02:01:07,280 Or do you want to close up? Yes. Let's close the meeting first. Yes. 1509 02:01:07,280 --> 02:01:09,280 He might be watching right now. 1510 02:01:09,280 --> 02:01:13,280 We're on tape. All right. Thank you all. We've adjourned at 739.