Jul 13, 2020 Historic Landmark Commission on 2020-07-13 3:00 PM

Hi, welcome to the Denton Historic Landmark Commission meeting. Today is July the 13th. The time is three o'clock. The first thing we're going to do is do the Pledge of Allegiances to the US flag. So if we can all stand and I think it's over here today. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And now, where's the Texas flag gone to? Well, we'll just have the Texas flag. Here we go. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state, under God, one indivisible. All right. Welcome, everybody. So good to see so many fancy faces. I'm Mary Anderson. I'm vice chair. Roy can't be with us today, but I'm sure he'll be back next time. I think our first item of business is to look at the minutes. Has everybody had a chance to take a look? And are there any comments or corrections? If not, can we have a motion? I so move. Thank you, Lenny. I see you there. Second? Second. All in favor, can we just do an aye or a hand vote? Aye. Anybody disagree? All right. It's unanimous. Thank you all. That was good. Off to a good start. I can't see everybody's name on here, but maybe we should just do a quick introduction. Everybody can see Ron, right? There's me. Then we have Angie. Where are you? Wave at me. Oh, there you are. Good. Okay. Melody, where are you? Oh, there you are. Sorry. Janelle. There you are. Okay. Good. Lenny? All right. Hi. How you doing? All right. Is that all of us or is there? Don't forget me, Evan. Evan. Hi, Evan. How you doing? And Katie. There you go. I'm here. Good. Good. I'm just trying to see if I can get you all on one screen. Oh, all right. I made it one screen of everybody. Excellent. Okay. So we have a few items. Yes. Do you have a question? Cynthia? Sorry. I didn't get you. Madam Vice Chair, I didn't hear your vote on the minutes. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. I'm in favor. Sorry. Thank you. Where's my mouthpiece? Okay. Let's see. Can you hear me? Can you guys hear me now? Yes. Okay. Great. Excellent. Okay. On our first item of agenda is to hold a public hearing and determine, and it's HLC 20-0008, to hold a public hearing and determine whether the presented expenses resulted in a permanent improvement and/or restoration of a local historical landmark property located at 923 West Oak within the Oak Hickory Historic District. The site is located on the south side of West Oak between Denton Street and Welch Street. And I think, Ron, you've got a presentation for us. Okay. [inaudible] Sorry. I was muted. I apologize. Let me start this all over again. Okay. Let me shut a screen. One second. Here we go. Sorry about that. Okay. Hopefully everyone can hear me now. This is a presentation for HL 20-0008 for property, again, located at 923 West Oak. The subject property is being requested for a tax exemption application. It is within the Oak Hickory Historic District, specifically 923 Oak Street, just south of Oak Street between Denton and Welch Street. This is a view of the home. It is owned by Chris and Emily Galanos. It is a local historic landmark designated. It's also referred to or referenced as the Radcliffe Schultz House for our records. So again, the application or the request is for a historic landmark tax exemption per section 10.128 of the municipal code of ordinances. A property that's designated as a historic site, again, this was designated already, can submit an application if they are able to prove that they have spent more than $10,000 in restoration or maintenance improvements of said property, which they have, and they've provided the staff with receipts for the following. They've provided receipts for the reframing and interior remodeling by adding new sheet rocks and other remodeling items in the sides of the house, and we've got some photos of those remodeling. They've also submitted additional receipts, which you all should have received earlier today for additional work on the exterior paint that they did on the house and also plumbing work that they did for the house related to the washer and other hot water heater as well. The total amount that they are submitting is 21,872, which far exceeds, again, the $10,000 minimum requirement for the tax exemption applications. I'm not going to read all of this, but this is that section of the Municipal Code of Ordinances speaks to what they are required to have. Again, they obviously have to be a historic site, which they are, spend more than $10,000 for permanent improvements and restoration. If and when they get this, eventually what will happen is they will go to City Council if the Historic Landmark Commission finds it in favor that they did spend the amount, and it is for the permanent restoration and improvement. The City Council will then vote on this tax exemption, and they would obtain 50% of their city taxes exempted from their tax bill every year for a period of 10 years. So that is something that they are looking to do under this section of the code. The next few slides are just photos of what was there before, some examples of the paneling that was there and the restroom that's shown here. What they've done is basically done the sheetrock, brought it up to code and standards related to the interior. Not much as far as any major work. Obviously, there's some plumbing or tiling that was done, as you see here as the result of the work that they did for this home. Some other areas that they've moved, just the second floor bedrooms and loft areas. So you can see that the exterior, I'm sorry, the interior has been improved as part of this work that they did for their house, for the house. The current property owner actually bought the house recently. It was the previous owner that did all the work, but the current owner is bringing forward this application. So again, they've also, in addition to what we just saw, provided additional receipts for exterior paint work that was done for the house. They've also re-piped the water, hot and cold, and located a washer line and a new drain for the washer as part of the project that they submitted for. And then also installed and relocated a water heater. So a lot of the work is important in order for the house to remain, as in my opinion, as a historic structure, which I believe this work would help in that effort. With that being said, staff is recommending a favorable determination that the expenses presented has resulted in a permanent improvement and a restoration of the historic landmark home located at 923 West Oak Street. That concludes my presentation and we'll be happy to answer any question that you all may have. Yes, ma'am. Mary, it's really hard to hear you. I'm sorry. Please unmute your microphone. There you go. Okay. This house is right across the street from my house, quite literally, and I saw it before. It was redone and I've seen it after. My question is, when were the receipts, I thought I looked and saw receipts for 2005 and then a smaller amount for $4,000 recently when our whole sewer line went ballistic. And I wanted to have somebody interpret the rules as to how far back we can go. When was this house landmarked? And because there's a rule I saw that went flying up that said it can only apply to things from two years ago. And I certainly want them to have this designation, but I also want to follow the rules. Right. Let me pull up the staff report real quick. Yeah, I could do that. I can tell you. And I just want to make sure I have the correct information. So the home was designated. One second here. Hey, Ron, can you hear me? Yes. This is Chris Galanis, the property owner. Hey, Chris. All the receipts. Hi, you guys. Hi, neighbor Mary. How are you doing, Chris? Doing well. Hey, all the receipts I have in front of me, Ron, that I submitted to you are from 2015 or later. So I don't have anything earlier than that. So yes. So Mary, you said 2005, but I'm looking at the designation. Yeah, I thought I saw five on the summer. This home was in 2015 is when it was designated on May 5th to be specific. And so the work followed in the summer. So again, it was designated May 5th, 2015. And the work followed in August and July and August of that same year. So it was soon after. I think it was just done with that September too. Yeah. Yeah, I got you now. The handwriting was just kind of sloppy. Great. All right. Other questions? All right. If no other questions, anybody want to make a motion? Lenny? It looks lovely. I was just unmuting myself, not really raising my hand, but that's fine. I will make a motion that we approve HL200008. And can I have a show of hands so it's easier to do? Do I have a second? I'm sorry. A second. Thanks, Katie. And can we have any discussion for this? I think we have to do a discussion. Discussion? All right. So if there's no discussion, can I have a vote? Everybody just put up your hand so we can say all in favor, raise your hand. Let's see. That leaves out Melody. I guess, oh wait, I have two of you. Oh, okay. Gotcha. All right. So all opposed? All right. The motion carries unanimously. Thank you all. Sure. Do we miss Melody? Is she out? No, no, she's there. It's just, she's got a voice on one and yeah, I know it took me a second to. Madam Vice Chair, I didn't hear your vote. Oh, I'm sorry. I raised my, I did raising my hand. I was unanimous. Yes. My apologies. That's right. I was doing hand just because it was easier to count. I don't know everybody's voice so well. All right. So the motion carries. All right. Let me move on to our next agenda item. COA 20-0010, hold a public hearing and consider an application for a COA in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton Development Code to replace existing porch flooring and steps leading to the porch of 723 West Oak, a local historic landmark property located within the Oak Hickory Historic District. The site is on the south side of Oak Street between Denton Street and Welch Street. So Ron, are you, do you have a presentation? Okay. We do have, we do have a presentation for this one. Let me find it real quick. Okay. So as introduced in the introduction, it is for COA 20-10 and it is for an application for a COA to replace an existing porch flooring. The property is located again in the Oak Hickory Historic District. It is specifically 723 West Oak, not too far from where we were just looking at the other application previously. The property is located again between Denton and Welch Street as shown on this exhibit. This is a photo of the home. It is owned by Roger and Helen Rikovsky is the last name. Close. It is a local historic landmark, another historic landmark designated home and is referred to as the Lomax House, again, per our records. A very lovely home located on Oak Street. What they are requesting, that is, is to replace the porch flooring and steps. As you can see that the existing wood flooring has weathered and has caused or is potentially going to cause some safety issues and therefore their request is to replace it. These are some shots of what is there now. Additional sections of the porch, as you can see, also seen some weathering and can potentially cause some safety issues. Additional places where the wood flooring is shown extends all the way around to the side of the home. So there is a lot of flooring that they are proposing to redo or replace, including the steps as we mentioned earlier. These steps will be replaced with the same material and then that material is what we have here. Initially when they submitted this application, the applicant asked, you know, would this need to be approved by the HLC and my immediate reaction was no. However, because the porch is also, it also includes these steps and I feel that it is a very important decision. I wanted to bring forward to the HLC for your consideration and therefore we have it here tonight or this evening. A lot of the criteria for the historic district, the architectural requirements, are provided in your staff report. However, I wanted to highlight a couple of places where it speaks specifically to front entrances and porches and as you can see here, the main thing is that the floor covering should not be carpet, which she is not. The style needs to match and because this is of a, in my opinion, craftsman, the use of wood and the proposed wood material in staff's opinion is complementary and consistent with the architectural style. With that being said, staff is recommending approval of the COA to replace the porch flooring and steps that lead to the porch for this subject property. With that, I will stand for any questions. So I, oh, okay, it's Janelle. What was the material there? What's the specific item? Let me pull it up real quick. And I believe the applicant may be here on the call if he would like to chime in while I pull this up. Yes, I'm here. This is Roger Rykovsky and the product we're proposing to use is Fiberon and it's a composite and it's a bungalow color from the Good Life Escapes collection. Janelle, did that answer your question? I'm looking at the staff report and there is more information related to the type of material, but were you, did you get the answer you were looking for? Yes. Fiberon is the manufacturing and it's composite boards. Are there other questions? Ah, Angie. So the composite board, that does not mean wood or it is wood? It is not wood. I guess it's more, mine is more of a comment. Did we not finally get around to approving fiberboard for house siding? And is that somewhat similar to this only for floors, for decks? I know what you're referring to Madam Chair. I believe the certain historic districts didn't approve that as a potential use, but I'm mainly meant for siding versus flooring. So I remember that discussion specifically meant for siding. So what are the rules then to be appropriate for historic landmarks for flooring? Would it be to replace with wood? Is that what is currently on the books? I don't remember. That's a little more detailed. Right. And I try to provide the information that we have in our code in the staff report and again back to the flooring front entrances and porches. When it talks about flooring and just talks about carpet not permitted in that that's all that we have under the development code. Of course, the intent is to replace with like for like. However, the image that you saw that the applicant is proposing, again, this is just staff's recommendation in our opinion, it does meet the intent of the architectural requirements. But again, this is something that I want to bring forward to the HLC for your consideration. Angie. When we are we open for discussion? Have we closed the public hearing? I think we need to have a motion in order to close that. Don't we, Ron? I don't know if we need to have a motion. No, then let us just close the discussion and then we can go. I mean, close the open meeting and go to discussion. Can we do that? Yes. Okay, then let's close the meeting to go to discussion. So Angie. My concern with this is because it's historic landmark property. I feel like it needs to be like for like and that would be wood for wood. It's already been deemed a landmark, a historic landmark property. And I think in order to keep that designation, it needs to be like for like, either one or the other. Either if they're going to go with that kind of composite and it's not going to be wood, then we take away the historic landmark designation. But I feel like if it's going to stay that, it needs to stay with wood. But the code doesn't require that. Well, it does a little. It's a gray area. It is a gray area. It says like for like. And so that is the issue. I just wonder if it's possible to make that which we can't see very much one form and then that which is visible to the street another form. I understand the need to get away from wood. Fortunately, many years ago, my house got made into cement for the porch. So I feel very lucky in a way. And is there a way of making the decking of the porch fiber and then the front part that exposed wood? I mean, just a question as our owner running around. Roger. Well, that probably would be possible. However, most of the damage is done on the edge. And if it's going to be remain a wood edge, that would. Yeah, that wouldn't help our problem. Can I see the picture again? Maybe while you can show the pictures again, Ron, just to take a look. And while that's going on, Janelle, you had a question. Yeah, I think, you know, the deck is a significant part of what we see, you know, of this house from the pictures. And I think that, you know, these are not cementuous boards. They're plastic. And, you know, it's wooden plastic infused product. And they do look different. It has a nice look, but it has a plastic look. The fiber fiber fiber. I mean, they are a good product, but they do not. It doesn't, you know, it's not a good product. There's a shininess to it. It appears plastic because it's a that's what it is. It's a composite wooden plastic. Ron, recently we talked, we approved a porch on it was on Oak and I've forgotten the side street. Was it Denton? Did we specify what kind of would they or what kind of material they should use for their porch? The grayish blue house. I remember that's off the corner. I don't think we did. I think it was mainly what was facing the street. The railing was what we focused on specifically, not the flooring so I see your point that the flooring is not visible from the street. Therefore, it wasn't the discussion with the HLC at that time. It was more the railing and the location of the access and the color of the railing. Yes. Mary, I would like to add something if I may. This is Evan. Yeah. So I'm looking at the appendix to the development code and appendix A3655 says that original porch flooring or ceiling materials such as tongue and groove planks, also known as center match strip flooring, should be preserved and retained wherever possible or replaced. Wow. That I missed. Well, I do know that people have replaced their porches in the neighborhood, the house across from me and next to the house that just got this vote for tax abatement. What is it called? The razor house. I think the razor house. They replaced theirs with Cypress wood because it would not rot. It was a long time ago, I will grant you, but that's what they did and not much is even visible from the street. I'm all for safety. That's why I'm kind of hemming and hawing over here because that porch looks horrible. Right now, it looks like it's ready to fall a little bit in places. Well, I mean, yeah, if it can't be replaced in kind. Evan, can you repeat that section of the code that you were referencing? Sure. It's 8.3 subsection five. Appendix 8.3. Of the Denton development code? Yes. Okay. Appendix 8.3 A subsection five. Thank you. My copy was printed in 2018. I'm not positive if this is still current. Yeah, I think that we have a new code in place and that's why I was assuming that it was not the current development code. Our code was updated in 2019. So you may have an outdated one, but it doesn't mean that it wasn't carried over. That's why I was trying to piece the places together if it was carried over or not. Do you think I can find something more current? Have we found anything? Yeah. I would just like to make the comment that I just think it's going to look substantially different to go with the plastic composite product. I think there are, like Mary was saying, there's Cyprus, there's other woods that are less likely to rot, but there's still a wood and they're going to have more of that historical look and be more in keeping and like for like because it really will be a substantially different look to go with the composite boards. And I do know that the Cyprus has lasted at least 10 years. So if that's any consolation, the price is probably similar. Yes, Angie. I'd like to also say, I'd like to know why this house was deemed a local historic landmark. And I'm guessing here, but I'm going to guess a lot of it had to do with that front porch. And that front porch is, it's iconic, it's beautiful, but I think that that is probably one of the reasons that it did. And so for us to now to kind of curtail that and allow it to go with a different material, I just think jeopardizes that landmark, that distinction that it has. Is there any more discussion? Have we found the porch? The original porch, when we moved in in 1996, was in very poor shape. It was patched several times. We continued to patch it over the years. It was a painted porch. We replaced the entire porch early this century. And upon recommendation of a historic consultant, we tried staining it because wood grain was appropriate for the period. That didn't work out. And so in the end, we ended up painting it as well. It's been repaired within that time period. We've had two major repairs of the porch itself due to rotting wood issues and buckling. And now it's in the state it is. And so we were just trying to avoid any more of that or any more expense every 15 years or so. The look of it, we have a sample of the flooring, which I wasn't able to turn in because of the COVID thing. But they said the pictures were good enough. In my opinion, looking at the sample, it doesn't really have that plasticky look like I thought it might. And I was happy with the appearance of it. And so I'm not sure that the photo really you can tell from that. But I think it would look appropriate for the house. And we would be happy with that. We are very concerned and involved with maintaining historic appropriateness of the home inside and out. And we were happy with this decision and think it would be a good choice. >> Also, all of the pictures that you may see of the porch in the shape that it is at the moment give you a very good view of very close up from above. The view from the street, which is so important for the historic commission, is actually from much lower. Our porch is raised up. So the view from the street is not the view that you see in those photos. Those are done in a way so that you can see detail to make you more aware of what water damage does very quickly. >> Do we know how much or what it would look like from the street? >> You would not see the porch itself. You would see the steps. Just the risers basically. You would not see the treads. But that would be it. >> The house is elevated compared to the street view. >> Janelle, while Ron is looking. >> I was going to put up the screen where we have a shot of the house if that is something that the commission would like to see. >> So we probably need -- we closed the public portion of this for discussion. So we think we probably need to keep an answer to one applicant. >> Can you go back to one slide back? Please, Ron. >> Sure. >> Do you see -- I want to see how the detail of the porch, how the boards are going to be exposed. Part of the look of the historic home is the way that they constructed the porch. So you can see the one that is rotting and falling apart by that post. But you can see how it is like a tongue and groove and they fit together. I know this is more recent wood but that would have been how it was built. But also the thickness of that wood. I'm curious like this new decking that they want to use, if it is thicker, if it is going to be detailed in the same way where you have a little bit of the overhang as you have each individual board coming out so that you see it. Because that is something that, you know, it is apparent. You see it from the street even if you see that edge. You see that green trim board and then you see the decking and there is a thickness to that wood. So it would just be nice to see the detail. Like if these planks, if they are thicker, are they going to be overhanging and, you know, stacked like that? Or how is their decking contractor planning to finish that edge? Because are you just going to see the cut edge of the fiber on? It would just be interesting to see how the detail is going to be played out to see if it would at least look. Because that is going to look very different if they take off the green trim board and put in this new product. And do you understand what I'm saying? Just like how that is detailed. It is going to be important to maintain that historic look. Ron, did you have the other picture? Sure. Now the picture of the decking. Because you see how on this decking, how it comes, it lands. It lands into, you know, like they have got a piece like this and they have got the pieces like this coming together. Yes. And then they have a second one that turns down like at your front like this. As opposed to looking at myself on the camera during this. As opposed to, you know, like the old fashioned way you just have all the boards and you are seeing your ends, you know, protruding below the baluster. So I think that I don't know if this can be finished in the same way. But I think that it would make this is going to look very different because this is a very modern look. The way that they finished this edge. And it is going to look very different than traditional, you know, historic homes where you see just the planking. And the planking is coming out and that adds to all the gingerbread and all the activity that you see going on on the front of a house is to see each of those little bits of boards peeking out, creating kind of like dentals along the front. So if they are able to, like if their deck, the installer can kind of look at how that looks. You know, the thickness of these are often a little bit thicker as well. I think that the original boards are probably maybe a little thinner. So I think it would be just interesting to see how they plan to resolve all that. Those are just some thoughts I have in terms of keeping it looking historic because, you know, you can have a historic house that once you change all the materials and it becomes a completely different animal. It is not a historic home anymore. It is not retaining the character because you lose those details that were put in originally. That is part of what gives it that feel. I think it is going to look totally different. I agree. I think it is going to look very different. It is going to look totally different mostly because it is not going to be painted. And that is something I don't want to do is to paint this because I think it has a good look already. The installation of this product, there won't be end boards. There will be one continuous long board on the edge and the boards will be laid similarly with what has been installed with the current wood floor. But there will be like a trim board with the same product so that the fiber on edges aren't showing to the street. It will just be like the edge of a straight board. But that I think is the point, Roger, is that I don't like the change of the look with the view to the street. Did I get everybody's issue correctly, Janelle, Evan, and Angie? I think that is one of the major points of that. So this is actually kind of closed, Roger, that it is kind of our discussion. So we will have to wait unless we ask you a question, I believe. That is true. Ron? So if we can hold off on the applicant unless the commission requests clarification or has a question of the applicant. So is there other discussion? Does anybody else have anything to add? If not, I would love to hear a motion. I move that we deny the application. Is there a second? All right. Now it is open for discussion again for this motion. The motion is to deny this application. Is there anybody that is on the commission that wishes to speak to this? Does it make a difference whether we deny or could we delay and allow the homeowner to seek perhaps Cypress to replace the wood or the nonwood that they are currently using in terms of filing a new request and fees and all? Is that possible, Ron? It would be -- if you deny this, it would be for the Fiberon composite material. Anything after that would be in my opinion a significant difference or different application and they can submit that next month if they wanted to. And what about the cost? There is no cost associated with it. They would be able to submit as they did the first one. Okay. Other discussion? If so, shall we vote? All those in favor of denying the certificate of appropriateness for the Flex Tron porch deck, I think it is Fiberon porch decking on COA 20-0010. All those in favor of denying that, please raise your hand so we can count. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. And all those -- I have to go to -- sorry, forgot to vote 6. All those opposed? All those not agreeing. It is unanimous. Hopefully our applicant will come back again shortly so we can get his deck fixed. Thank you for participating today. All right. Let me get grouped together. Are we ready for our next one? Let me take a water break here for a second. All right. So the next up is COA 20-0011 to hold a public hearing and consider an application for certificate of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton development code to demolish and remove an existing storm shelter at 1035 West Oak, a local historic landmark property located within the Oak history district. The site is located on the southeast corner of Oak Street and Welch Street. So, Ron, do you have a presentation? This is also better known as the Evers House? Yes, we do. As introduced with the introduction, again, this is the COA 20-0011. The proposal is to remove an existing storm shelter that is on the property at 1035 West Oak. Again, within the Oak history district, similar south side of Oak between Welch and Denton as previously seen in previous applications. The site is owned by Slaton Realty Management LLC and the property is a locally historic landmark designation. And as mentioned earlier by Madam Chair, it is often referred to as the Evers House. I don't have an exact location of the storm shelter, but I'm guessing it's in this general vicinity here since this is the only one that I was able to identify. Okay, appreciate that. So, the applicant is requesting a demolition of the storm shelter and the next few slides are just photos of the shelter itself. It is obviously made of concrete. There is, from my understanding, from the applicant and the applicant hopefully is on the line and may be able to elaborate at a later time. It has standing water. There is no drain that's on the bottom. So, it's been an issue for them when it comes to the rain and the stagnant of the water inside the storm shelter that is. The other item that they referenced was that the steps are narrow and not safe and so not really conducive to acting as a storm shelter as it was originally proposed. The applicant, again, my understanding from their application is that they would remove the top three or four feet or maybe two or three feet from the top and then fill the rest with dirt. Drill holes, I believe, in the bottom of the storm shelter so that it would flow or drain appropriately. But fill the storm shelter with dirt and just not have one on the property or at least this one as part of their application. I'm just going to reference this. I'm not going to read it for the entire T. It is just that any demolition of a building or structure, that is why the HLC is considering this. We wanted to make sure that any demolition of any historic landmark, one within a historic district, was presented to the Historic Landmark Commission for your consideration. The section of the development code, section 292(d)(1), references any demolition or removal shall consider the following. The state of repair of the building or structure, the existing and/or potential usefulness, including economic usefulness of the building, the purpose behind preserving the structure as a historic structure, and the character of the neighborhood and all of the other factors it finds appropriate. These are the four that you must consider. There are other considerations that you can certainly offer as part of your discussion. Staff feels that the existing storm drain is not, I guess, is approvable for a removal of the storm shelter. With that, staff will stand for any questions. Janelle? Explain again. They're just drilling holes so it will drain and then filling, but they'll leave the portion that's above. It looks like there were some shutters. My understanding is that they will remove the concrete at least two to three feet below the grade, and therefore it would be dirt. There will be, obviously, some of the remaining structure below that two to three feet area. You won't see it. You won't see any of the structure. They're taking up a level raised part in the steps and everything. Correct. They're just not pulling the whole thing out. Correct. Two to three feet below the ground level and then filling the rest with dirt. Was that built at the time of the home or when was the storm shelter installed? I tried researching that. In fact, I was not successful in determining the structure, but I still felt that it was important for this HLC or this commission to consider, but that is a good question. Unfortunately, I don't have an answer. I have a little bit of information for that. The information I have is does everybody remember Dorothy Bertine, the watercolorist who recently passed away a couple of years ago? She painted beautiful pictures of homes that no longer exist in Denton and in the historic district. At any rate, in her master's thesis, she wrote about the history of the Evers house. I just have a couple of pieces. Her thesis was published in 1975, but clearly she's relating it back to another time. Mrs. Lula Evers trip remembers on another occasion how all the neighbors shared in the use of this cellar, as well as the social life of the house. One day, when the unusual storms come up, all of the family prepared to spend the night in the cellar only to find that it was already full and some more people were waiting outside hoping to get inside. The storm shelter outside, she went back to the house. It's been around before 1975 and she's doing the history that Mrs. Lula Elvers trip was talking about her mother. This goes back many, many years ago. This is in fact probably one of the first storm shelters in Denton. It is historically significant and that I think is something we need to keep in mind. Also, I do believe that this house is a registered Texas historic landmark. I think it was done in 2017. Therefore, that has bearing on what we're going to talk about. Who was anybody had a? All right, Angie. I have two questions. One is what are the dimensions of the storm shelter and has the applicant looked into refurbishing, maybe waterproofing, because for what I've heard is it was due to water there. Is it possible to waterproof it? And then the stairs being narrow, that's true with every historic structure that we have. So, I get that that can't sway me one way or the other. But the water issue is I would like to know if there was something. Have they checked into any refurbishing? This is Charlie Slayton. I'm the homeowner and I'm happy to address that. Just to make sure everybody can hear me. Can you hear my audio? Yes. Okay, fantastic. Thank you. Yeah, I'm not sure to the prior question of what year that shelter was put in. I know it's quite old. We've gone through a series of attempts to try to keep that from flooding. Normally in Iran, I think you had a picture there of the steps that looked out from that. You can see a water line associated with that that goes probably up to about, you know, two to three feet below the surface level of the stairs. So, it's unusable. And let's see if you can see that right there. If you look about the third step down, you can see a line right there on the left-hand side of that picture. That's where the water level gets to unless it's constantly pumped. And I've worn out about three different sump pumps trying to keep that flooding from occurring. Problematically, as you all well know, that you can't take and discharge flood water like that into the storm sewer. Code doesn't allow you to do that. So, you have to put that out into the yard or you actually have to put that onto the driveway. That water goes down into the gutter and transitions to the south there on Welch Street because the closest storm discharge is around the corner, right there on Welch. So, that pumping it creates a hazard. A lot of water in the gutter down there and I've kind of cringed a couple of times and I've tried to pump it down. We have talked to different people. I had a company come in and actually do a fairly extensive renovation in the half basement that is underneath the house, which now functions as a laundry room down there. We went ahead and we put a lot of guttering down underneath the ground and put some pumps and all that in there. It's about $3,000 or $4,000 a project for that laundry room. In conversations with them, this is much lower and accumulates a lot more water. So, it would just be a constant recirculation of groundwater through there. Those of you that have lived in that area longer than I have, I don't know if this is a historic problem associated with the levels of groundwater in that area or not, but we've seen a lot of flooding. So, in answer to your question, we've taken a look at it. We consider it to be not resolvable as far as remediation of the flooding to that issue. And not only understand the comment about the stairs, but if you can also look over to the left-hand side of the left picture, you can see the rod associated with the storm doors. We're going to do a set of storm doors about every year or two on that because of the presence of the moisture underneath that. So, I consider it a flood risk, a safety issue associated with the doors and the presence of water down there. You all know that this house has been on the market now, and we've received negative comments as well from people that have looked at the place as potential buyers that they considered a nuisance. Mr. Sleightman, are you a registered hydrologist about floodplains and things? No. Just an opinion then? Yes. I have never seen that area flood. I live about less than 200 yards from your house. So, I've never seen that area flood. It would have been useful had you had pictures of the water raising. I know the water table in Denton is high, but that part of the Evers house is at least three or four feet above the street level. And I can assure you, Welch doesn't flood, since I have lived there, unless we have about 10 inches in an hour. I've lived there for 16 years. I have not noticed this. It would be helpful in your application if you had reports from the people that you had done and detailed reports. This, I think, is a very historic structure. And it is also, according to Denton County records, Melody, you might correct me, but this is a registered Texas historic landmark. And therefore, any changes actually have to come from that have to be approved by them before us. So, I think we may be in the wrong spot altogether. Are there any other comments? Yes, Cynthia? Madam Vice Chair, I just wanted to ask that you ask the property owners their name and address and invite them to speak. A couple of them have jumped into the meeting. And I just want to make sure that everyone that's listening to the meeting knows who's speaking. Mr. Slayton, are you still online and can you speak to giving your full name and address? Yes, most certainly. Charles Slayton and my address is 103 5 West Oak Street. You live on Oak right now? It's my primary residence, yes. Gee, I never see your realm. Sorry. I have a question, another question. Yes, please. I'm sorry. Angie. So I would like to know if the flooding and that is from groundwater going into it, or is it groundwater coming up from underneath? Yeah, happy to tell you what the folks told me on the basement over at the main house is they said that it was based on groundwater coming up from the bottom and and infiltrating in that in that way. So you don't know if that's what's happening in this store shelter. That's what's happening in the basement. I need to know what's causing the water and what we are discussing here today, which is the storm shelter. It's it's it's my opinion. And I don't have a hydrologist to verify that. But it's my opinion that it's groundwater that's infiltrating into the into the basement. Groundwater from the top, not from the bottom. From underneath. I'm sorry, groundwater would be underneath. Yeah, underneath. OK, Janelle. Yes, I just was curious. I would, you know, if if they got further information and there was a problem with the the cellar and groundwater, I don't understand how that would require the removal of the upper portion. But I think you could definitely probably fill in the basement and retain that exterior that kind of adds to that, you know, the old school look. So I was wondering if there was another reason that you plan to remove the entire entrance and indoors other than just the doors requiring maintenance. Would you like for me to answer that? Yes, I think that. Oh, OK, certainly. The the approach to the demolition was recommended by the contractor who took a look at that. There's no real reason not to to to take that out. And I've I'm in the health care business. We do hospitals and I've demolished hospital sites before and basements. And normally what one does, if there's not a plan to rebuild on that site, you just go ahead and knock the sidewalls down into the bottom and fill it on top. Now, doing that precludes your ability to build on top of that anymore. So that's not that you would ever build on top of that, that location for that storm cellar. But it's just the approach that was recommended by the contractor. I don't have any problem with filling it in. I think that would eliminate the flood risk and it would probably eliminate any safety concerns as well. Do we have any further questions for the applicant? If not, should we close this meeting and open our own discussion? No. Right. Lenny, I can't hear you. You're muted. Can't hear you, Lenny. I said I think that would be appropriate. Thank you. If so, let's close the meeting and then we can go on to some discussions. Anybody on the commission have anything to discuss now? If not, do we have a motion? Go ahead. Let's see. Let's do Evan. Yes. Sure. I like the idea of preserving the exterior. I mean, you can't see it from the street though. I just pulled it up on Google street view and I looked at it from every angle and I go down that street all the time. I've got a close friend who lives over there and I I've never noticed the storm shelter, but I think there is some interest in maintaining the exterior. I don't see any reason to maintain the interior. I think if that's filled in that's fine. I actually went by today. One of the reasons I was a couple of minutes later than I should have been and you can see the little whirligigs from the outside. I could see it. And now maybe I ride in a truck and the meeting is closed, Mr. Slayton. You can see it from at least from my truck. I can see the top of it. I knew where it was. If you walk by, you can see even better because there's a low fence. Anybody else? I thought I saw Janelle have a question. Comment. No. Angie. I'm torn with this because of the water risk that it could it's it's hazardous. It could be dangerous. We don't have authority to tell them what type of door to put on that storm shelter. If there's water coming up, it could be hazardous to children. I am wondering though if they have not waterproofed it. If they had and it still didn't work, I definitely would go with it. The demolition, but not knowing that they've all they've done is pumped water out. I don't know if they've done anything to keep the water out. That's my concern with it. But to your point, Madam Chair, I'm wondering about this Texas designation if we even have authority to rule on it. My understanding is state overrules county overrule city so that they can't go ahead with demolition until the state approves it, I think. So irregardless of what we choose. So I think that unless I'm wrong, Ron. Ron, you're muted. Ron, you're muted. Sorry. Mary did mention this to me earlier today and I tried to research that reached out to our Texas Local Landmark Commission. I haven't gotten a response. But if anything happens today, for example, if it was approved, we will make sure that the Texas Local Texas Landmark Commission will have to provide their approval or consideration before we issue any demolition permit to make sure that they are aware and have made the approval of this subject application. If not, then obviously we would not issue any demolition permit. Melody, I believe it's on the county record that is a registered historic Texas Historic Landmark. You're on the County Historic Commission, aren't you? I am. And it is. And it is. So I'm not wrong. Because it is an outbuilding, I would have to take a look at what the requirements are. And I can, it's worth a call to THC to find out how that chain would work because it has dual designation. I would certainly, is there other discussion? I would entertain a motion. Lenny? I was just going to ask if we can ask the applicant, has he waterproofed? So we at least know what the answer to that question is. Mr. Slayton? Yes, it has not been waterproofed. And the reason that I had not done that is that the people that advised me, I asked that same question on the basement next door that several feet higher. What I was told was that waterproofing doesn't actually work in that circumstance, that you have to put sump pumps and so forth down in there because you can't prevent the water from seeping up due to hydrostatic pressure through the cracks in the thing. So no, we did not try that. That was just based on prior advice. Off on another question. I'm just a little concerned with the lack of background and a lot of opinions going on. It greatly concerns me that we don't have any of this information in front of us. I don't know how you all feel, but I don't have that in front of me. Anybody else? Anybody have comments, questions? I was just going to say that regardless of the state and county decision to approve or not overriding ours, I don't think there's anything that actually prohibits us from ruling on it. Maybe not, but I hope that the final say, if it is a registered Texas Historic Landmark, that nothing gets granted no matter what we say until they have their say. I do think it's worthwhile to research this a little bit more because we don't want to get into any confusion as to its designation and who covers what on the property. Does that make sense? Yes, and I think a little more detail on what has been done and what has been reported would be quite useful. Because I just keep hearing opinions on the current laundry room, by the way. That's really what I'm hearing. And hey, it made it into a laundry room, so that might happen, Janille. So are we ready to make a motion? Oh sure, I'm ready any time. Okay. I don't know if I can get this right. I motion that we put this aside for now and have further information as to who's got jurisdiction first, the other historical commissions, the county and the state, and that the applicant maybe comes back with a little more information on more technical information that was requested by some of the members. Evan, can we do that, Ron? Can we do that, Cynthia? Madam Vice Chair, could I ask the commissioner a question? Are you asking to postpone it to the next meeting? Yes. Okay. So the motion on the floor is to postpone COA 20-0010 in order to find out who has priority on the call of whether this is possible, and two, to give the applicant an opportunity to supply sufficient background information so that we can make an intelligent decision, not based on opinion, but based on facts. All right. So are we having any discussion on this? I think we need a second. Evan seconded it. Oh, okay. If not, are we ready for a vote? Please do so by hand and/or voice. All those in favor of Janelle's thing, raise your hand. All right. Let's see. And all those opposed? Okay. It is unanimous. We vote to postpone this to the next meeting. Thank you, Mr. Slayton, for coming before. We'll look forward to seeing you in your August or September. I don't know when the next meeting actually is. It'll be August. Okay. It'll be in August. All right. Thank you. All right. Now we are moving on to -- hang on. All right. Our next agenda item is COA 20-0012. Hold a public hearing and consider an application for certificate of appropriateness in accordance to section 2.9.2 of the debt and development code to add a balcony access and railing at 607 Pearl Street, a local historic landmark property located when the Oak history -- Oak Hickory Historic District. The site is located on the south side of Pearl between Denton and Carroll Boulevard. It's -- yes. Well, you might want to take a look at it. So it's about adding this. I think Ron will take it over. This is also, I believe, a registered Texas historic landmark, if I am not mistaken. Melody, you might tell me, but I think it was registered in 2016. Ron? Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, this property, 607 Pearl Street, is also a Texas registered historic landmark. The subject application for this COA is to add a railing to facilitate the use of a balcony on the property. As indicated in the introduction, it is within the Oak Hickory Historic District. And the exact location is at 607 West -- sorry, Pearl Street. And you can see it by the red identification. It's between Denton and Carroll Boulevard. This is a view from the street of the home. It is currently owned by David Gray. In addition to a Texas local landmark, it's also a locally designated historic landmark and is referred to as the Simmons-Maxwell House. The applicant is proposing to add railing, as you see here, in the two shots. The first one to the left is the existing, and then to the right is to show what the additional railing would look like if it were to be constructed. This is just a rendering of what that top railing would look like. This is a view of the roof balcony on top of itself. Again, the railings would be along the pillars that you see there or the wall that you see there. And again, it would be a black iron railing to provide the additional safety as this balcony is used. The access to the balcony itself will be from the window shown here on this photo. The door will be coming off of a window -- I'm sorry -- a office, I believe. And the replacement of the window will be of a door. And again, the exterior door will be similar as the existing window -- I'm sorry -- doors that are within the house or on the house. The development code does provide architectural requirements as it relates to the Ok-Korea Historic District when it talks about architectural details, any additions, and then the use of color. As stated earlier, the intent is to have the door be consistent with the doors that are currently in the house. The only consideration I would like the Historic Landmark Commission to consider is that the black railing, iron black railing, would be something new to the proposed home. Also, in addition to some of the other architectural requirements, we do have specific windows and doors. And as already stated, the style, the size, the frames, and the openings will be consistent with the existing doors that the home has. And so with that, staff has reviewed this certificate of appropriateness and is recommending approval of the balcony access and railing at 607 Pearl Street. With that, staff will stand for any questions. So much like the last agenda item, it doesn't matter what we vote. We'll have to go through the state ultimately, correct? Exactly. Yes. My intent was to provide this information to the applicant. Mary did mention this to me this morning. With that, if whatever the commission decides, any alteration permit, we'll need to wait after a decision has been made by the Texas Landmark Commission. So that will be needed prior to any alteration permits issued by the city. Can we vote now and withhold the permit until they've gotten their other approvals? That is my hope. We certainly can do that. I'm going to maybe ask our legal department. We can certainly put a condition that the approval of the COA is pending or is dependent on the approval of the Texas Landmark Commission. So this faces the street. This railing faces Pearl. Is that correct? Correct. Let me share my screen again. I just want to make sure I've got all the facts before I go on. And I wish we had a view of the side of the house. And is the applicant present? Mr. McRae? Yes. This is David McRae. I guess I would like to know, are there not other windows and things on the side? Because that window to door conversion is likely to be visible because of the height and where this house is from quite a distance. And is that really a balcony or is that a roof? Today it's a roof. They've used it previously as a balcony, but I don't know if I would. That's the reason we had someone come in and look at it, because I'm not sure I would consider it a balcony and I would want it to be reinforced before we'd use it that way. Angie? This is Evan. I encourage all of us to make more use of Google Street View. I'm going back up and down the street looking at this from different angles. And it looks like that area is very shrouded by trees. I don't think it's going to be easy for people to notice that there's a railing there. The house is kind of raised up and the neighboring house has so many trees. Trees do not last forever, Evan. Trees come and go. 100 year old trees have gone down in storms. So I don't want to use that as our excuse or as our reason to give it. The question is, is it historically appropriate to do this, both the color, the railing, the changing of the window to a door? And my question for the applicant is, how high is that wall on this roof? I would have to measure it again. But my guess is it's about three feet maybe. I can measure that again. But we did have someone come and look at it. And what they wanted to do for the railing was just to make sure it was within code to bring that up high enough for whatever the code was. And what is the code? How high will this railing be? There would have been an additional, I think it was between 12 and 14 inches over the current walls. And they were going to, their suggestion was to basically, the inside of the wall where you see now where it's kind of covered with roofing material, that they would make it a stucco material that would match the outside of the house as it is today. Okay. So my question for you, Angie, I'll get your next online, is if you're going to raise it 12 to 14 inches, the way you're showing this is certainly large enough for a small child or a large adult to just slither right through. So I don't know where the safety exactly is. I don't think we have enough detail about that railing. And the color is questionable based on the house. Angie? Well, my question was that. It looks like a metal black railing does not go with the architectural design of the home. Well, I think that could be so cool to have that and, you know, to have a door and to have a balcony there. I mean, I think that would be really neat to do. But I'm not, I just think looking at that railing to me really detracts from the architecture. Is there, have you looked at other types of railing that could go in with the architecture design of the house? Has there been other material looked at? I'm not sold on that one, but I am sold on making it a balcony. I think that's a cool idea. Or a setback. I'm sorry. I, yeah, we did look and also consider wood, which I would be fine with, actually. That would be a preference of mine. The contractor that we had to come in to give us the estimate. His recommendation was this because of the strength of the coupling and the length of the railing that went across the, I guess that's the east side, which is the majority of the balcony. That he was saying that was, this would provide more stability. But my, I would, I'm, either one would work for me. And if we did the wood, if I can get it to work, then we could do the wood and provide the stability, then it can be the same color as the house. Okay. There we go. Unmute. I was going to say, I don't object to the balcony. I do object to the humeral. And I do think that I would get somebody, I would get, you know, a consultant or something that, you know, beyond just the contractor, there are so many options that you could do that would match the style and, you know, be simple and not detract from the house. You could also paint the, the metal to match the color of the house. So it just kind of disappears. I mean, there's, there's a lot of things that you can do for that additional handrail that would not detract from the home. But I do think the black pipe railing is, is, is really, it's, it's not a good, it's not a good solution. And I think wood would similarly not necessarily be a good solution, but, you know, the house itself is plastered. You could raise a little portion of the parapet at the back. I would just, I would take a little bit more look at what your options really are, because there's, I mean, even if you did metal, like I said, you could do a decorative metal and it could be painted to match. There's just, there's a lot more options. And I think what's shown, it looks like, like not, not the, it doesn't have the thought put into it yet, but that you, you know, keep it historical. It's such a lovely home. Yeah. And I don't think it would have a great expense to, to just do, even have somebody consult, you know, like get a designer to give you a quick consultation. Historical person. Historical, yeah. You know, somebody could give you a recommendation that would save you some time down the line. Other questions, comments, questions for the applicant. There's no further questions or comments. And I didn't ask and I forgot Cynthia. Mr. McRae, your address is? 607 Pearl Street. Yes. And your full name? David McRae. Thank you. I'm sorry. I just needed to do that for legal reasons. Is there any more questions? If not, can we close this to, to make it a closed meeting now and have any discussions or no discussion emotion? Madam chair, if I can interject real quick, just mention that there are two responses or comments that were submitted to the commission prior to the meeting from two individuals. I believe most, or all of you hopefully have received that. I just want to make sure that you are aware and that was something that you had? I had seen those two. I do know where one of the individuals lives. I don't know where the other lives and how that relates to this particular project. Neither, as far as I know, neither one of them look directly at the house. They're just friends and it's nice that they have great friends that love them and think they're great neighbors. I think the same of my neighbors, but that I think is not relevant to the issue at hand. Their comments just weren't relevant. That's fine. I just want to make sure that that was part of it. That there were there, that it was some, it was Angie and Angie Williams, I think. And Billy, maybe it was Billy Williams and Angie. I'm sorry. I don't remember who it was now. I looked and I even, I'm sorry. I don't actually remember who it was. I mean, let me pull it up real quick. Right. I had it and I've seemingly lost it. Billy Matthews and who is this? And who? Billy and Angie Matthews. So that's one, that's one, actually just one home. Okay. Yeah, they both said that they just liked the look and they were great neighbors. So that was, that I think was the real, pretty much the comment. So is there, if there's no more discussion, can I, can I ask for a motion on this particular issue? Ah, yes. Janelle. I motion that we postpone where they get their approval from the other, I'm sorry. State historical, state historical people. Yes. Is that appropriate Ron, Cynthia? Is that something we can ask to do? Madam Vice Chair. May I ask Mr. Mangita a question? How long a period does that take to get approval? I don't know how long that would take. Something that we need to find out. If we need to postpone to a date, there's no notification requirements. So we can certainly say to a date, answer and bring it back as soon as we can. But isn't there a time limit that this has to be done by? Correct. If it's not, it has to be acted on within 75 days or it fails or it's approved or automatically approved. Well then how about let's motion that they return with some alternatives for the handrail solution. Can we, can we just have like a up or down vote? I know that sounds funny, but Angie, can we, we're in the midst of- Right. I think I want to- We're not ready for a motion. Let's- Yeah, but I was thinking if we did, it would be to deny because I would not go without it's presented. What is being presented to us is the rail and I, that black rail and- And the window door. And the window door. And I'm not in favor of that railing as presented to us. So- Cynthia, I think we're messing up Robert's rules, I believe. Please correct me. I just have a question. Commissioner Coddham, have, would you like to withdraw your motion? Yes, I will withdraw my motion. Okay. Thank you. That would clear it up. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So now where are we? We were still discussing. Is there any additional or different motion that would like to be put forward? Are we able to- Sure, I move to deny as submitted. Do I have a second? I'll second. Angie, discussion now. Lenny. I think it would be appropriate to tell the petitioner exactly what we are denying it for. I mean, if we wanted a different color, tell him so that when he goes to the state, he's already changed to show what we want. I suspect he's listening in, just muted now. So I think he's pretty much heard a lot of our discussion, thank goodness. I mean, I think in short summary is the railing doesn't fit the house. The color does not fit the house. Alternatives and anybody who is a historical preservation designer has not actually been approved. It's been a contractor who just wants a quick job and is out of here. And I understand that. And I think it's a beautiful house. It's one of the centerpieces of that area. And it deserves to keep that historic thing. And we do appreciate the neighbors so much, our current owners, for looking after this house. And we want it to look beautiful and we want them to have their wonderful balcony. We just need a little bit more, I think is what I'm hearing from people. But that's just discussion. The motion at hand is to deny the current request for a railing and balcony access at 607 Pearl COA 20-0012. Can we have a vote? All those in favor of denying this application, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. The vote has been unanimous. I thank you very much to our petitioner. Please take our words to heart. We want you to have what you want just in a more historical manner. So I think we'll move on to the final, I think the final thing for today, Ron, is here. COA 20-0013. To hold a public hearing and consideration, consider an application for COA in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton development code to replace an exterior door and aluminum storefront with a new sliding automatic door with the same aluminum storefront material at City Hall located at 215 East McKinney Street within Quaker Town Park, a designated Texas historical marker site. So I think, Ron, probably you have a show for us. Yes, let me pull all this PowerPoint. One second. And if everybody remembers to mute themselves again. So as introduced in the introduction, this is for an exterior door replacement here at City Hall located at 215 East McKinney Street. The subject item is brought forward to the Historic Landmark Commission because it is a part of our Quaker Town Park, also a designated historic landmark, Texas historic landmark site. And we wanted to get the application, the COA application, considered by the Historic Landmark Commission. The door itself is located close to where the city secretary, city manager's office is located. It's one of four entries or five entries into the city. It is the area right here, and I have some photos of that location in the next slide. Is that the door just right over here? Yes, ma'am. This is the door itself. If you're familiar with the courtyard, it's the one if you're facing the building to the right. That's the proposed location for the automatic doors. The proposal is to replace it and to be automatic, but still have the same material, the aluminum material that you see as shown there on the photo of the existing door that's currently in place. This is a photo of what the interior looks like at this time, the existing location. This request came from our city manager's office. I believe there were some discussion with city council, but ultimately the city manager's office requested that there be an automatic door for several reasons. One, it will serve as a single point of entry. It does provide more accessible for the ADA to be able to open as people approach. And then last, because of COVID-19, the ability to have a touch-free entrance at City Hall was another reason for this proposed application or this proposed application. These are some schematics, specifications for what it would look like. The one to the left is the interior vantage point, very similar to what it would look on the exterior, but obviously you can see that the sliding doors are going to be different from what is there now. And I don't know if you need specific information on dimensions, but you can see it's your typical automatic sliding door as you've entered in any other locations that may have this type of door. With this application, with the review of what was submitted, staff is recommending approval of the COA to replace the exterior door and aluminum storefront to be of a sliding automatic door here at City Hall. With that, staff will stand for any questions. Thank you, Ron. Oops, sorry. Angie? Well, I don't have a question, but I'm going to say good job with like-for-like kind. It's what we like to see, and I don't think we need to split hairs over which way a door opens for that, so good job. Actually, those are just breakout doors. What I would like to see, could you show me the picture? I was just trying to look at whether the little line that's there will still stay there on the sliding doors, or is it just one solid piece of glass? Because these doors have a nice little line at about three feet high or something. The applicant, hopefully, one of our staff members, hopefully is on the line and maybe be able to answer that question. Because I'm just staring at the doors now, so it's very easy to see that there's a nice uniform line, and it's the continuity. See right here, I don't know if you can't see my mouse, but there's a nice line kind of across, and whether the new ones will help maintain that continuity, that would be something that would be nice to see on there. I know the door itself doesn't, but it's close. There's a horizontal line. Right, I see what you're referring to. Aren't these lanes right here that run across? Right, and I mean, I don't think it would be too hard to add that onto that door, frankly. I don't know. Billy, do you know if Robert is on the line to answer that question, or is it something that we can consider? It doesn't look like you're on the line. I hear somebody. Robert, is that you? I guess not. Okay. Can we look at the next slide with the drawings of the... I don't see it. That's what I... It doesn't appear to be there, and I don't know if it's capable of doing that, but again, I'm not able to answer that question. I would be excited if it maintained that horizontal line. I would have no problem. I don't really care how it maintains it, whether it's the... They say there's an optional muntin bars, which would probably do the same thing. That would be really nice just to maintain the overall look, and look is something important. We're changing an O'Neill Ford building here, folks. This is one of the Premier Texas architects, and so that would be my only thing. If I had my druthers, I would have that on there just as a requirement to try to maintain that horizontal line. Sliding doors are great. I couldn't get in today. I was pounding on the door, that door. Who's got a question, comment? Angie? Well, I don't think there's a horizontal line on the door, the glass itself. I think there's a bar right above it as you get in, but I did not believe... It said, "Look right above that. Go to the door right there." That's the door handle, I think, getting in and out. They're going to replace one of those whole panels with a sliding door, and therefore, that one will go away. That's what I thought, if they could just put in just a look. Janiel? I was going to say that the optional muntin, they can tilt the manufacturer where they would like that located, so they could keep in line with that. Right now, it's actually two panes of glass. It's a lower pane and an upper pane, so that's a mullion in there between that, but they'll be replacing that whole configuration right there. They probably could request that, Ron. They could request the location. I had a question on the drawings where it had optional... It says, "Optional transom." Where is that? Oh, yeah. Up at the top, and let's go back to the other picture. It is a transom all the way at the top, sort of. Well, right now, it's covered. Right. You see it from the outside. I don't think it has always been covered, Ron. Are they planning to remove the sheetrock? See, on the outside, it's just frosted. They'll probably maintain that one on the outside, and it's frosted, but I was curious that on the interior, if at some point, they had put sheetrock across there for electrical access to the exit light, or whatever, if they may be... Yeah, I see what you're talking about, this area here. It's shown on the exterior, but on the interior... On the interior, you have the sheetrock. Oh, the exit line, yeah. With the exit line. I don't know if that was something that was put in place at some time during the renovation. If they're planning to go back and open the whole thing up, it'd be interesting. It'd be interesting to look at the original plans and see what was actually there originally, but... Yes, I... Since they've got it on their drawing, and that's why it's curious. Yeah, no, that's a good point. I think both points, the horizontal line, and also opening up that window, that transom, are good questions. I just wish that someone from staff can help answer that question. I don't have the answer to that question, and I apologize. Sorry, let me get you guys back up. Hello. Who's there? Robert? Yes, this is Robert. Hey, Robert, did you hear those three? I'm sorry. I've been walking the meeting. I did not dial in until just now. My apologies. So, Robert, there are two questions related to the design of the door replacement, one being these horizontal lines. Do you see those lines that run through the entire windows on both sides? Yeah, those lines are not going to be in the new door. That's going to be a solid window on both sides. Those chair rails can be added after the fact, though. And we would have those colored of the same like material. Okay, so we can add that later after the installation. That's correct. And the second question... It's a chair rail where people would lean against the door, but it's probably not going to be in the first installation. But we can add that in a later time. Yes, sir. Yes. Okay. So the second question was the transom window above. It's currently not shown from the interior, but on the exterior, it's there. It's just covered up. What are the plans? Are we going to impact this area or adjust this area, or is it just primarily from the door down? Or from the... Well, that will have to all be pulled out from the top, and the top window will also be replaced. But the blind will be put back as it is right now. Okay. So that'll be glass still and kind of the same look? Yes, it will. Will it still have the same divisions? It will still have the same look above it with the blind being replaced. And it'll still have the vertical divisions on the... Yes. On the transom portion? Yes. Okay. Because that wasn't clear from the picture. Is that a part of O'Neill Ford's actual architecture or... I know that that area has been renovated before. I don't recall what this area looked like before this aluminum doorway was installed, but I would guess that the window that you see now, I believe it probably went all the way to the top. Yeah. Looking outside now, I can see part of it further down, and it did go all the way to the top. And the horizontal blinds continue throughout the entire front. So I think that... I'm most concerned about maintaining those. The transom is cute, but I don't see it repeated elsewhere, but I don't see all the courtyard from here. Sorry, Madam Chair, if I can ask, Robert, is this blind just because of the sun? Is that primarily the reason for this to be located there? I believe so, yes. Yeah, but it's actually a blind. Are you talking about the shade that's above the window in the transom? Yeah. We couldn't tell it was a shade. I thought it was sheetrock, but if it's just a blind, that makes sense. Yeah, this area right here, that's just the blind. Yeah, it's off of the... It's hard to tell on the tiny screen. Okay, yes. That's just holding the top of the door frame there. That's for vertical support of the door frame. That's so that when the door slams open and shut, that the window won't flex there. And so that part will still be there when the sliding door also goes in. This right here, the panel above that, that is because of the sunlight? Yes, yes. Yes, that's what that's for, yes, the sunlight. Yeah. Other discussion? Questions? So I just want to ask one more time that you said that the horizontal lines could be included in this? Are you talking about the ones that run level with the door closure? I'm sorry, the door locker? No, the ones that run level with what all the other windows look like. Okay, yeah, the chair rail. It would be added to the door. It would make it look so much more like it fit in even though it's modern. Yes, it can. Yes, it can. Yes, it will? Yes. Yes. Other questions, comments? Angie, Melanie, Katie, Evan, Lenny? I think accessibility is paramount with city facilities like this, and it doesn't look that far off from what's already there. Yes, certainly just as long as we do the horizontal line, it can be a piece of tape where I like here. Yeah, just put a piece of paint or something to maintain the line. We need to have accessibility. All right, anybody want to make a motion since I don't hear anybody commenting? I will make a motion that we approve this request. Second. This is COA 20-00133. Is it possible now? I don't remember Roberts to add a friendly amendment to that. You're referring to the lines. Yes. Yeah, the horizontal lines. Cynthia, there's a second. Can they make, I believe you can do a friendly amendment? Yes. I would just like to add a friendly amendment that they maintain some form of horizontal line that's the chair rail that matches the rest and in some form or another. Nothing fancy, just something that visually looks like it belongs. And I have no objection. Okay. Discussion, comments? Are we ready to vote? I'm ready to vote. Everybody else? I'm sorry, Evan, did you have a friendly amendment? No, I'm ready to vote. You have no issues with that, the horizontal lines? Not at all. No, I think it'd be great. All right, so Lenny, did you have a question? Are you ready to vote? Ready to vote. She's ready. All right, let's vote on adding our accessible doors, maintaining the same look as before with the friendly amendment to make the lines somehow shape or form neat and look similar. All those in favor, please raise your hands so we can get a count for Cynthia. And all those opposed? And again, we are unanimous. The ayes in favor of having accessible doors have it. I believe, thank you very much for answering. I forgot it was Billy who answered our questions or Robert. So I think that's kind of where we are. Do we have any other business to attend to? New business, old business, anything else? No? The concluding items, do we have to worry about that? To add into this at all? Yeah, that's for any items that want to be added. No, no. All right, do we need a motion to adjourn? I move to adjourn. Yes. Can somebody move? Was that you, Evan? Yes, that was me. I move to adjourn. Second. Second. All right. So all those in favor? Can I count two hands? Thank you all so much for coming. I certainly appreciate coming to the Zoom meeting. It was great. Thanks for all the hard work and effort. Have a great week. It's only Monday. It's got to be better, right? Thank you, guys. Thank you.