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