Aug 10, 2026 Historic Landmark Commission on 2026-08-10 5:30 PM

Thank you. All right. We have time to call the meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission to order on August 10th, 2026. It is 530. If you will please stand before me to do my pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to the Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. Wave all. I was going to just leave that because I need that. Oh, sorry. No, I was waiting for you to do that. I'm just going to give you the floor for that. That's right. All right. I do not see anyone from the public to speak, so we will move on with that. We're going to move on to our next item for consideration is HLC 26-043 to approve the minutes of the July 13th, 2026 Historic Land mark Commission regular meeting. I move for approval as submitted. Okay. I will second. One of the John's will second you, John. All right. We have approval and a motion to approve as written and a second. All in favor, raise your hand. Any right votes? Okay. Any amendments for that? All right. The next item on our agenda is to consider COA 26-00002 to hold the public meeting and consider an application for certificate of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton Development Code to restore the awning at the commercial building located at 118-120 North Locust Street. This site is located on the east side of North Locust Street between East Oak Street and East Hick ory Street within the Denton Square District. All right. Thank you, Chair. Sure. At least we don't have the podium, so it's going to be a little boring for a while. As stated, this is 118-120 North Locust Street, also known as the Downtown Mini Ball 2. It is located on the east side of the square. It is located within the Denton Square District. It is also a local landmark as well as a contributing property to the National Register Historic District of the square. The applicant is Shirley Will and the construction date was circa 1913. So this is just a little bit about the property and its alterations over time. We have the 1938 property when it was the plate lunch. We also have our 1940s photo where we see that thicker banding along the awning, some change there. 2024, which I think most people are most familiar with, and then present day without the awning itself. So the request is to install a new awning where the former awning once was. Currently the design or the design does show it is compatible with the current design and layout of the property, but it does have a new banding design around those edges. The materials will continue to be the roll-formed aluminum canopy and then the steel support rods. These are just some of the framing plans. So it's 8 by 52 feet, so it is quite large, but those are the current or the former designs and boundaries or just dimensions of that awning. Same dimensions as what was previously there, I guess. So looking at staff's analysis, it did look at the standards for rehabilitation, specifically Criterion 9, which is talking about exterior alterations that do not destroy the historic materials, features, or spatial relationship that's characterized the property, but the new work will be differentiated from the old. Staff also looked at Section 410-7, which is part of the Denton Square District, specifically looking at fenestration, glazing, entry standards, and under that is the awnings. So staff is recommending approval as submitted for the COA to restore the awning at 118 120 North Locust Street as it meets our Secretary of Interiors for Standards of Rehabilitation in Section 410-7, which is the Denton Square District. And I can stand for any questions. I have two questions. Yes. One, if I'm understanding correctly, it still looks slightly different than the one that is replacing, but same basic look? Yes. Okay. Second question, do we know when, I guess, the prior awning was put in with like one of that look? So... You showed us two other examples that were older. It obviously is after 1940. Do we have any idea when? Unfortunately, I looked into it. I couldn't find any historic documentation showing when it changed, but the applicant did say that they were trying to go something that was reflective of the 1940s, because that's the period of significance for that historic district, is early 1900s, the 1940s, but they didn't want to obviously copy it exactly. I mean, it's been there since at least the 80s. Yeah. I know that much, but I can't say more than all. Okay. So we don't know how old the awning was that they installed, that fell down and collapsed? No, we don't know when that was installed. We don't know when that was installed, because that was installed before we had any... We didn't have the other... So in terms of... It could have been the 1940s awning with that additional banding removed. It could have been the 1938. It could have been the 1938. It does look very similar to the 1938 style, and then the 1940s might have included a banding, but like I said, I didn't find any strong documentation between the 1940s. And if you go to 2007, it looks exactly what you saw in 2024. But I will take your own knowledge, because if you grew up coming to the square and you have that knowledge, it looks similar to what you know. But as I stated, kind of looking at that standards for rehabilitation, we don't want to do necessarily like for like. They want to add the awning back, be compatible with the square, be compatible with the structure itself. But we don't want it to be... Because we don't have... They're not looking at all the historic photographs and evidence. They're going for more, let's get that awning back in place versus let's do a reconstruction, which is where you have to pick the specific year and say, we have all the documentation. Totally understand that. I'm not asking that. I'm actually ... What my concern is, they collapsed in the first place, and how old was it, and do they even know? And so part of this has to do with the structural integrity around the square that's not going to be a problem. So I understand what they're doing. I grew up on a farm and I understand what those rolled bands of aluminum are. That's a barn top. And I know exactly why that was put in during the late '30s, '40s. I think we need something a little bit more than just like a rolling aluminum band top. We're not dealing with like a 1940s Huckleberry town anymore. I don't know. I'm going to throw this out to commissioners. I'm just a little concerned about its collapse in the first place. And I don't know. I want to see something that's going to be a little more secure and something that's maybe a little bit more durable than the bare minimum. I will state in the backup, there is the structural report. They had to do a structural report because of insurance and to collect insurance they had to show why it failed, how they are going to replace it. But that is provided in the backup. And I assume they have to have a permit for it. I'm not in a position to judge structural integrity. I don 't have a degree in that. But I hear what you're saying. It looked like in the photo, like it was ice. It was ice filled up to exactly what happened. Yeah, but it looks to me like maybe in the new one that seems a little bit more structurally sound. Just the frames around it and all you don't see in the other. We can't tell that from the diagram, but I would assume there's a front gutter this time. There wasn't a gutter previously, so they are going to be adding a front gutter. That was slide off. For drainage. A little more inclination . I read this appointment material. They're going to have a little bit more of an incline. But I just have concerns. It's like something a little bit more. I think valid concern there too, Mr. Treat. My question is for staff. As far as structural design, engineering design for the safety for that, is that done with permits? Like do we know before it comes to us, do we know if that's approved with staff at the city? Because I think it's very concerning. So that goes through the building safety. So this is the step you have to, HLC has to review before they even go for building permits. And that's how the process is set up within the code. That 's why I'm trying to put in that note whenever they go in there, because if they need supporting poles or something a little bit more than that rolling aluminum barn top. You see what I mean? I want them to know. I want them to know is like we've seen this and I'm a little worried about it. So I think a difference if maybe to explain it as far as aesthetics. Okay, but the structure and things when we approve something to say, oh we're totally fine with it for us to look at the safety of it because the ice and snow is going to happen again. Those top supports that go into the brick, you know how old that brick is? Yes. You see what I'm saying? And this is one of the reasons that the failure happened. I mean it's in the report and they're going to fix it. I have fixes. I understand. But my concern, I just want to be very clear so that whenever inspection and safety come in, I'm like if you need to make additional recommendations that are more up to par beyond just our surface appearance things, please go. But we can approve with conditions as well. So we can make a recommendation approved with conditions. Okay. As a commission we can do that. And I think that it's valid. Thank you for bringing that up . Any other discussion? Thoughts? So I, we would, you have to take a formal vote and I think if you all are comfortable with doing approve with conditions, I'm very comfortable with you all doing that, but you all have to specifically state what that condition is so that either building safety knows what to look for moving forward or I'll give out some examples. You could say if you all have to change the supports and everything when you go to building safety, you need to come back for a final HLC review if it's going to change the look and final design. Or you can say, you know, we want to, building safety needs to do X, Y, and Z to ensure that it can be supported with the current design. So I think you just kind of need to put that into your, I guess here, right here. It needs to be, that needs to be read. So it needs to be staff recommends approval with conditions, list the condition and then the rest of it. So since I'm the one that's complaining, laughing, I'll put my name on it. Can you hold that thought for just one second? Only because I think, do we have a question or a question? Okay. So if you'll, can you just? I have a question before we make a recommendation. Okay. So working in architecture in Colorado, I know that there's building codes, specifically you have to like calculate for snow loads. But I would imagine the code that we use here doesn't have to take into consideration. Does it make sense for the recommendation to like, cause if the concern is specifically like the weight of whatever is going to be on it, which is the weather. So they operate by the 2021 international building code. So I would assume that as part of their analysis in terms of the load factor when it comes to the audience being implemented, but I cannot necessarily speak for buildings. Yeah. That's not kind of my purview. So, but I think it's a great, it's a great map. Well, they do include ground snow load by PSF and roof light load of 20 PSF. So it looks to me like they have sometimes though. Well, I guess I don't know if this is not, it's not my expertise, but I wouldn't like in Colorado, those would be potentially of a higher rate. Right. And so if we're factoring in for this, maybe happening more regularly, maybe we're trying to have 20 pounds of square foot. It only has to fail once. Yeah. Yeah. 20 pounds per square foot is pretty low, which would be a historical Texas. Right. Right. But that's not what this event was, but this event was also, if you're taking into account that the supports on that were over Jesus Christ, how many, how many decades old, right? I don't know how to work that in, but it was to ask them to do that. And now I mean, what if we, specifically, I'm not sure it's our purview to set specific like requirements, but I'm wondering if we could at least put in there, keep in mind this is a high traffic area, like, you know, that sort of thing. That would suggest whatever maybe heightened standards could be applied, maybe should be. We don't set the metric that we ask them to pay attention to whatever metrics they set. Right. But I do like the idea of if there need to be any structural changes, it needs to come back before us. If it affects the aesthetics of all this. Did you have a question? Pretty much take care of this. Any other thoughts? I will say this too. We have several options. We can approve as presented. We can be flat denied. We can approve with conditions. I believe we can table. You can table and continue to date certain. And we can do that. So we have, I just want to lay that out before we get a motion that those are choices that we have. So at this time, pressure treat, if you do have a pause, you so I'm going to unpause you. Thank you for that. It's always valuable. Because I do think that we can approve with conditions. It 's not that I'm reticent about staff recommendations and the standards that have been set forth. I just want to make sure that we, as a commission, give a little extra license to have another look, look at this. Because again, I will just reinforce, I'm very concerned that it failed the way it did. We're lucky that no one was there, but at a high traffic area, et cetera, I would like a second look. And so I really appreciate the ideas that we need to maybe re-ex amine the loads and ask for city staff recommendations and maybe bring it back just because appearance wise. Okay. I'm willing to go with the role Barnertot, but yeah, I'm worried about the load factors. And I just want to make sure that city staff knows that they have our support, that if they need to recommend more, we're also thinking along those same lines. So if I'm making a motion, it's to approve with conditions and the conditions are twofold. First of all, to examine the load bearing factors. And number two, to question if there might be additional structure supports that would make this extra safe, that would come from city staff and engineers. Anything to add? And I'm open to any time. You wanted to come back before us. And for it to come back just for us to have it, just a blush look at what would that look like? Because I do understand that if we're adding additional supports, we might be running a little bit afoul of the traditional look. Does that make sense? Like we have like lower supports that might run afoul to the upper supports. I'm trying to, so that I will be quite honest, I don't think I've ever gotten to approve with conditions in terms of, I guess, tabling it for staff to do additional analysis. I think that's what it sounds like, at least from my perspective, is that we're doing approval conditions because the request is to do additional, is it building safety to do these analyses? And if they are concerned that it's not going to be able to support it based off what they're recommending, that they then need to come back to HLC? Or is it, if staff doesn't find any issues that they can continue onwards without coming back to HLC? Or do you all want to hear? So I think that's kind of where I'm getting held up because from my perspective, loads, all that kind of stuff, that doesn't fall within my personal purview. I'm just worried about the design. But the design, if the loads, why don't they bring it back? So would it make more sense to table it and request some additional analysis on whether structural changes need to be made to be consistent with what John's trying to do? I think we would just need to do it, continue to a date certain, and that would be the next meeting in September, which I believe is September, Lindsay , I'm so sorry, I think the 14th, I believe, 13th or 14th. In that case, I would draw my motion. September 14th. John, if you want to do it a little better. So would you be withdrawing your motion? I'll withdraw my motion for the approved with conditions. I'll defer to Dr. Homey if you want to table. I guess I'll make a motion to table this, our consideration of this item, to give city staff, engineers, whatever, an opportunity to evaluate the conditions, whether structural changes need to be made in order to make it safe. Can you add table till September 14th? I guess I'm happy to do so. Thank you. All right, can we do we have a second? Before calling for a vote, can I read some of this? 10.0 structural design philosophy, rather than replicate the original connection system exactly, the replacement design will improve the load path into the masonry while preserving the building's appearance . The design philosophy includes distributed reactions into the masonry through bolt through bolted connections with steel backing plates for practical reduced localized bearing stresses, increased connection redundancy, maintainability and compatibility construction. 11.0 is existing masonry evaluation prior to installation. The engineer shall verify wall thickness, brick condition, water condition, presence of voids, existing cracks, previous repairs, moisture damage, corrosion of embedded steel. Installation shall not proceed until deteriorated m asonry has been repaired. Just feel like, well, and then there's even more repair requirements in general notes. I feel like they have it brassed along with this. I would agree, but even that masonry repair should be coming to us, should it not? Yes. So that's what kind of gave me a red flag as well. So when Commissioner Treat says if that changes it needs to come back to us and I just want to make sure because it says that that us approving it's not giving a blanket for them, oh we can just do that now because that for the masonry if it is on the outside that has to come before us as well. So exactly. Exactly. Okay. So I'm going to, I'll go ahead and say my concern is with the material as far as the looks and things that parents, I think it's in line. I don't have a problem with that, but my concern is the safety with it being it looks like galvanized metal, you know, like and I'm wondering if with some of those structures that we have does it even address that in city code for material, the weight bearing for the snow on that material because it's different on the roofs than it is for an aw ning. You know the same with even the awnings that have to clock overall. You've seen those, you know, those they can tear too. So anyway that that's my concern as well. So I made the motion but I still have a question. What information do we want to get received from city staff that would away our concerns? Very good question. Very good question. I'm going to get their recommendations on load bearing, get their recommendations on what current best practices would recommend to make sure that safety is primary concern on that. And then second, get those involve any type of significant alterations that we might have second one. And I'm sure they are but I would also like to hear that they are aware of why the previous awning failed and the times of the fact that that area is much more high traffic than it was at the time of the previous awning. And Ms. Fatt, to your point, like the recommendations they're making in that and it's absolutely those are the things that they're looking for or whatever. I just want to ensure that that wasn't a going to be a pencil check off, send it to us, do it. Right? I want to be like we're paying attention. I need some assurances you're paying attention. And so we can do some assurances right just assurance quality control. Perhaps we could also ask and obviously they're not particularly doing the work but I suppose an engineer maybe could tell us based on what this plan is how significant are the masonry repairs likely to be right it may be very minor you know we may be overthinking it I don't know but they may be like no no no this is going to be really extensive. When we get the backup material my thought was I would have liked to dumb for them to come before us with all of it at one time. Okay here's the masonry that needs to be repaired here's what we found is the damage the water damage I was hoping they would have already done that then us approve it on again then find it for this for the safety . Yeah we had a failure we're not just addressing a cosmetic thing so there was a failure and either the business was negligent or city code enforcement's negligent I'm not saying there's negligence what I'm saying what I am saying is there was a failure and we want to make sure that doesn't happen again and that's all. So it does feel kind of PCO is what you're saying. That's what I'm saying I kind of think it's the cart before the horse and I was hoping that we would have had that structure first to make sure it was sound before we're approving this so I agree with tabling it to find out from city staff on low bearing and as I would like city staff to know that we're not opposed to the material that they're using if it is safe and the way that they're going to construct it is safe. And I will just preface that in terms of the building code if it is like a new construction if they're wanting they do have to follow obviously the 2021 international building code when it usually comes in historic structures they are more lenient obviously they don't want any safety hazards or public health issues coming as a factor but that might change the design so I think it I think it is a good thing that you all are wanting to bring it back you know continue to attain certain bring it back I will just state that if there is concerns with the load bearing everything the design could potentially change drastically where it might not be historical in context. Because what is what we're talking about does that give you enough direction or would that give you enough direction in terms of information needed? Oh yes yeah I can definitely bring this to our building safety team and have a full discussion I can actually be able to bring answers with the presentation. All right so just to recap we have a motion we have a second to table till September 14th meeting and asking for information from city staff on low bearing construction safety of of the request and if there are we will come back and have a report from them all right so all in favor of the motion raise and say aye any opposed all right all right moving on item 4a number hlc 26-033 on our agenda is to hold a discussion regarding the next steps of the designation research committee and the community outreach subcommittee to assist in the establishment of a potential new local historic district generally located along the north alm street and north locust street corridors between west mckinney street and west university. So I'm still just like lost in data and everything is taking forever but I I think I have a couple questions. The first I think is I think it I think it might be a good idea a good time to start picking out some addresses of note the buildings of note and I'm certainly willing to take any specific suggestions I don't know the best way to do that like if they send you suggestions and then you just send me yes that yeah that works maybe something along those lines and you know because I'm going to try I need to find the block the census block records to try to track people but I mean I think so you know there's a lot of addresses we are it's a language that I mean we can do but anyway so I think maybe trying to focus in on some key addresses spinning wheels is a great example. The sleeping lizards building. There may be other buildings of interest. And maybe ones that you think are representative of that area right not just spinning wheels because it's spinning wheels right but there's ones that architecturally speak to you. I think that will help me at least start to maybe have more of a product to give you. There's a house on the corner the white house I think it's on locusts on the corner and it has I think it might be an event place right now big two-story. I know you know what the one down from ground law house or the one like two houses down from ground law house is that I think it's it's a wide and they have events there and they have parking on the side and in the back on the side street you know roughly what block that would be in or like what intersection oh where joseph's was no it's down from joseph okay north north is that bed and breakfast I think that might be that's what we're next door to joseph where joseph's was no except that one but that one too that bed breakfast one this one too and this is an additional way so just a little bit north of which i'll take a look you know another one that might be also fun is the building where that artisanal butcher just went into the old car dealership yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah hey john in the um the list or the file or the database or something that we have are those in any kind of order what do you mean hope that just as I just scroll through it goes from elm street to first street oh did you send that out to everybody yes okay cool um I'm not actually sure what that looks like because that's not how I work with it but I can put it in a better order no it didn't matter I just wondered if there was an order yeah well I have it on my view I can like I have a clickable map so I can literally just click on a property and pull out uh what is available for that um so if you if there's a better organize it you know wait no I just kind of wonder about there was yeah um I mean that's yeah and I wonder if the meat market is 505 north elm that was once owned by what Nats well I would imagine the car dealership definitely it's from that which are a lot of those buildings right no but that's what that was that was didn't bowl before the meat market right that's right yeah for a multi-nation yeah what's a multi-nation or now it's Montgomery bowl or whatever it's changed 1010 north elm where burger burger dental is 1010 north what's there right burger dental it's a very new entry ball then I'm sure your interest is in it is because he's also my dentist just a little bit no I'm not sure you don't have I know um yes yeah the motor yeah I like that so anyway again so if anyone was a request you know right at this moment but if you have any other questions I'll try to start because I mean I can go I mean you can get lost in all these things oh yeah what years at some point I have to start showing change over time I'd like to thank you I appreciate all the research and the work that's been done um with this committee okay I was like oh I can't tell you guys or your work on it all right we're ready to move on item 4b number hlc 26-034 to receive a report and hold the discussion and give staff direction on the historic landmark commission request for local historic designation of eligible historic properties do we have any properties that anyone's interested in going forward well the one that I had briefly discussed with you right it's gonna sounds like it's gonna fall through okay unless you have lots of money that you can offer so I have some um it's kind of so I have two properties that I was doing Texas Historic Landmark Visitation Board one of them was Oak Street Graph House um it was turned down this year and the reason it was turned down is they didn't pay their hundred dollar fee on time um however I did research that I'll share with city so that maybe city can move forward and do some type of designation that helps us for this next year's application which I've been encouraged okay that's great uh the other is a house uh over on uh all right um I'll send to you it's one of the it's one of the gothic houses that got moved over um and Denny okay over in Denny Lindsay yes on the Lindsay street that's it I checked piano lessons it's the local landmark property uh so yes I was working on a designation for him but because it had been moved from downtown to its current spot it's not eligible until 2027 and they they told me that they noticed that on my application oh okay but it hits its 50 years for that move this next year and so I've already done the work I want to share that okay with me and make sure that we are coming up to talk for this next year limit I have a problem now okay uh the scalp oh my gosh the scalp type that by evers part yeah that one oh wow uh they are they're already it sounds like they're already working towards like state or national designation um and I haven't been able to sit down with the person in charge of all of that um because of some health issues was that moved from it was so I know I can't see for certain day I don't want to know that news right now okay sorry I guess you type it dead and it's immediate negative news so okay so where's it it's uh steamers park uh right there right there yeah yeah oh okay so so it's in that little yeah I haven't had a chance to sit down and like kind of suggests whatever but they are currently trying to raise money because that siting is falling apart and the original is still underneath it but it is the log it was the log I don't know maybe it was not the original original it was something it's siding but it's void but anyway they're raising money currently to try to replace that so and there is a chance perhaps of convincing them to go to the local process as well because there is at least money and obviously they need some help because I mean of course all that was done off the books no whatever it's been moved I've kind of looked into it I mean I mean they they're they have a they have some organization going on right now yeah yeah yeah haven't planned right now and in past years I haven't helped fix I call it fix that signing they they have never applied to numerous emails to them yeah I was in that trip so they'll use it you know where they live yeah so you can show up at their door yeah main person had a major surgery and I haven't been speaking with them since but I guess once you kind of are able to touch base with him um yeah I wouldn't put it like oh yeah no no I know um and we can kind of move forward do they have any historic photographs or anything of what it looked like I'm assuming they do but I wasn't sure okay we kind of go yeah I'll try to get a meeting and just to discuss possible okay sounds good because I'm recalling that one in the park I think it was the Girl Scout yes I think it was all uh it was all offices for the Girl Scouts so that maybe it wasn't great it got moved from Quaker Town it's okay it got moved down to 380 right it's going to 380 right Midwest yes it was moved out there but this it would have been built I would guess right around 1918 that's when the troop originated um it may have been a couple years after or something so this probably are these are two different ones I don't remember that my mom worked in the she worked well and this one got moved a long time ago I could literally yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah I really got that donated yeah I found the article whatever that scout hut was donated about the Evers family right so it's actually part of the E vers farm that's city property no no it is now that's the thing is they carved that off it was originally part of the Evers yeah that they carved off during the city which is why right it's being developed around okay anyway I'll see if I can fix the products oh that'd be wonderful thanks any anyone else have anything to recommend all right we're going to keep moving item 4b number hlc 26- 035 on our agenda is hold a discussion regarding the historic landmark commission project matrix so exciting news regarding the former entry wall the county I reached out both to GDAC and the county the county has expressed interest in obtaining the wall I did ask them for last week for some clarity in terms of where they would want it located all of that just so we can have some idea before we officially sign it over this is yeah yeah yeah so it's in the dme easement so the city is able to get it out of there we can get the access we don't have to get text-off permission we don't have to do any of that I went out with DME on site and was able to kind of walk through that but we just kind of had to find a location for it and someone of interest just because kind of talking through internally from staff one of our biggest worries if you know if we place it a city park or anything like that one of our current rec centers it would kind of get lost yeah in its location and Denton county is obviously the experts and kind of relocating homes kind of telling that larger story that or GDAC in terms of kind of interpretive art once it's kind of moved it could become considered interpretive art of some sort but we never heard back from GDAC and then Denton county had like I said has stated interests and said that they would be interested in having it being moved but I'm waiting for clarification where exactly they would want it moved to probably what I thought of the idea with GDAC unofficially they're really on to the process they were intrigued by the piece they were not terribly intrigued by the idea of having it on their property so no I can see the historic the historic part to see it getting much better yeah being able to interpret that into these kind of generational pieces right perhaps even by the the wooden building yeah yeah yeah I could see it fitting in really great so we're just waiting back I'll let you all know what they kind of their general idea of where they want to place it um I will say staff did actually recommend their Evers farm location just because it's north of university and kind of is represented that agricultural aspect but still having her so I'll let you know if they like that idea or not I am afraid that the downtown historic part it just is swallowing up everything and so at a certain point it's hard to tell different stories yeah it kind of something like that especially like let's feast in family because the thing is they're not sure what how they're going to interpret that up there they're actually still I don't want to get anybody in trouble but they're still trying to like clarify what the city meant by what was going on with the Evers Park property if they were transferring city ownership of that property to county or they were just taking possession of thing it's it's out there yeah we're gonna let the new council work it out so I have no idea um but I don't I don't hate the idea I like the idea of like turning that true interpretive space as well um but again I'm also not mad about putting in his short part because it can work there that story could work and part of the timeline I think she did so that's all I gotta say about them so I 'll definitely keep you all updated hopefully I have something um come September appreciate your work of course and then uh the rest of our items are ongoing um in terms of just kind of well I guess I think we do this in concluding items so never mind but yes so these are the rest of our items um I don't know if you all want to add anything additional or if we are good with this is there anything that's come up that's kind of you know intrigue you all that uh you would like additional research or something else to add or so part of the matrix now that we're Halloween town um I just want to throw this out I don't think we need to make a decision that tonight which is why I just want to bring it up um I feel like this might become a new year-round kind of uh I mean Denton is Halloween capital of Texas is going to become a recurring thing and I think the Historic Commission have an active role so I feel like perhaps placing on the active matrix something about Halloween initiatives and just leave that as a place holder and nothing to do tonight or decisions to make tonight but to maybe push that forward because here we are in August we are less than 60 days out from the start of Halloween so I'm just throwing that out there and um I think that item might be a useful addition to uh things that um our commission can say that we're actively doing is to be an active participant in those events every year I'm hearing you say you want to build a haunted house that looks really old we already have one it's called 1926 well I think we need more to he's recommended to put something on the matrix we have anyone in favor don't we have to have yes we need to have at least three wonderful anything else to add to the matrix so our next anything else any other additional business to discuss the commission tonight going once I have items but I'm just waiting to see yes I have items to share um so we have an exciting potential project coming downtown you all might have seen the signage on the golf station um it is not locally designated it is not recognized by the national register it was determined it wasn't even determined eligible but for back in the 1996 survey because it wasn't 50 years old at the time during that uh but they are looking to do some restoration work on the outside of the golf station get that up and running again for public use so I've met it is yes I believe it's 301 that's really close 301 301 and 302 is what I was thinking I think maybe three or one more guess I'm sorry that is an educated guess based off of but again it's on the McKinney and locus that corner but um so just want to share that with you all um as staff I've met with the general the owner I've talked about opportunities with national register um designation I've talked about the state uh opportunities I've also talked about local and with those tax exemption um opportunities there so he's he 's kind of weighing the options right now so we'll see but I kind of did that initial education um confirmed that he does have a gentleman who's involved who has worked on historic properties because I did say you know that is kind of a key you know um former gas station and car repair location and that it's very prominent on that corner people love it and so he's very much aware that um he wants to do his due diligence by it and make sure that it's a quality product so just want to kind of give you all a heads up that that is kind of in the progress I'm hoping that he'll come forward for local designations that you will have the opportunity um because I know that's something since I've started that the commission has brought up here and there randomly just saying do you think we can get any progress there so I think it's a new owner and what it was a few years yes I believe so yes yeah so yeah so I'm hopeful so just wanted to share that fun exciting news and hopefully keeps continue to be exciting and new um new information there um in terms of our southeast denton um historic resource survey consultant we staff made an internal final decision today I can't share that news until we've let the consultant know but I'll be excited to share that with you all next meeting um and we're excited to get that project going I think I think it will get I think it will be a good experience and um definitely will be an opportunity for the commission to get involved especially with some education and training um and ensuring that the community knows what's going on um obviously staff has had some lessons learned from south ridge and how those conversations went you know I'm only humans we've learned um but um so I think it will be a great opportunity though for the commission to get involved um for that historic resource survey especially since it's at the national register level and a nomination will be coming out of that so I think it's really a really good practice for you all practice for staff and also just making sure that the neighborhood gets excited about preserving the history um in terms of other additional information some staff did attend the national the napc forum which is the national alliance for preservation commissions uh that was held in minneapolis we went at the end of july and uh we were able to train some planning staff and historic preservation which is really exciting hailey got you means me hailey got to go um so now she's like oh I understand like some of the like lingo you're using everything um but it was very informative we got some good um ideas for the preservation program kind of still formulating those met internally with hailey and our director charlie i was involved to kind of just talk through some preliminary ideas but i'm hoping I can have some exciting news and some additional information to share with you all um in september and in the fall so yeah thank you and now i'm done well it sparked an idea so if that golf station is to go through the one right over here on elm which has the big like glass window which would be and they decorated all for christmas yes which one the one right here the other one yeah or i get my own little change that's right all right anything else all right we are adjourned at 6 23 p.m