WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:12.760
 Hi, welcome to the Denton Historic Landmark Commission meeting. Today is July the 13th.

00:00:12.760 --> 00:00:19.680
 The time is three o'clock. The first thing we're going to do is do the Pledge of Allegiances

00:00:19.680 --> 00:00:28.280
 to the US flag. So if we can all stand and I think it's over here today. I pledge allegiance

00:00:28.280 --> 00:00:35.160
 to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one

00:00:35.160 --> 00:00:44.640
 nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And now, where's the Texas flag gone

00:00:44.640 --> 00:00:53.520
 to? Well, we'll just have the Texas flag. Here we go. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge

00:00:53.520 --> 00:01:04.760
 allegiance to the Texas one state, under God, one indivisible. All right. Welcome, everybody.

00:01:04.760 --> 00:01:09.800
 So good to see so many fancy faces. I'm Mary Anderson. I'm vice chair. Roy can't be with

00:01:09.800 --> 00:01:16.200
 us today, but I'm sure he'll be back next time. I think our first item of business is

00:01:16.200 --> 00:01:21.080
 to look at the minutes. Has everybody had a chance to take a look? And are there any

00:01:21.080 --> 00:01:31.760
 comments or corrections? If not, can we have a motion? I so move. Thank you, Lenny. I see

00:01:31.760 --> 00:01:41.940
 you there. Second? Second. All in favor, can we just do an aye or a hand vote? Aye. Anybody

00:01:41.940 --> 00:01:47.400
 disagree? All right. It's unanimous. Thank you all. That was good. Off to a good start.

00:01:47.400 --> 00:01:52.480
 I can't see everybody's name on here, but maybe we should just do a quick introduction.

00:01:52.480 --> 00:01:58.080
 Everybody can see Ron, right? There's me. Then we have Angie. Where are you? Wave at

00:01:58.080 --> 00:02:04.640
 me. Oh, there you are. Good. Okay. Melody, where are you? Oh, there you are. Sorry. Janelle.

00:02:04.640 --> 00:02:09.560
 There you are. Okay. Good. Lenny? All right. Hi. How you doing? All right. Is that all

00:02:09.560 --> 00:02:13.920
 of us or is there? Don't forget me, Evan. Evan. Hi, Evan. How you doing? And Katie.

00:02:13.920 --> 00:02:19.040
 There you go. I'm here. Good. Good. I'm just trying to see if I can get you all on one

00:02:19.040 --> 00:02:22.960
 screen. Oh, all right. I made it one screen of everybody. Excellent. Okay. So we have

00:02:22.960 --> 00:02:28.480
 a few items. Yes. Do you have a question? Cynthia? Sorry. I didn't get you. Madam Vice Chair,

00:02:28.480 --> 00:02:32.880
 I didn't hear your vote on the minutes. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. I'm in favor. Sorry. Thank

00:02:32.880 --> 00:02:38.400
 you. Where's my mouthpiece? Okay. Let's see. Can you hear me? Can you guys hear me now?

00:02:38.400 --> 00:02:46.760
 Yes. Okay. Great. Excellent. Okay. On our first item of agenda is to hold a public hearing

00:02:46.760 --> 00:02:54.040
 and determine, and it's HLC 20-0008, to hold a public hearing and determine whether the

00:02:54.040 --> 00:02:58.760
 presented expenses resulted in a permanent improvement and/or restoration of a local

00:02:58.760 --> 00:03:05.360
 historical landmark property located at 923 West Oak within the Oak Hickory Historic District.

00:03:05.360 --> 00:03:10.040
 The site is located on the south side of West Oak between Denton Street and Welch Street.

00:03:10.040 --> 00:03:39.040
 And I think, Ron, you've got a presentation for us. Okay. [inaudible]

00:03:39.040 --> 00:04:02.580
 Sorry. I was muted. I apologize. Let me start this all over again. Okay. Let me shut a screen.

00:04:02.580 --> 00:04:23.160
 One second. Here we go. Sorry about that. Okay. Hopefully everyone can hear me now.

00:04:23.160 --> 00:04:30.720
 This is a presentation for HL 20-0008 for property, again, located at 923 West Oak.

00:04:30.720 --> 00:04:42.940
 The subject property is being requested for a tax exemption application. It is within

00:04:42.940 --> 00:04:53.260
 the Oak Hickory Historic District, specifically 923 Oak Street, just south of Oak Street between

00:04:53.260 --> 00:05:04.100
 Denton and Welch Street. This is a view of the home. It is owned by Chris and Emily Galanos.

00:05:04.100 --> 00:05:11.680
 It is a local historic landmark designated. It's also referred to or referenced as the

00:05:11.680 --> 00:05:21.280
 Radcliffe Schultz House for our records. So again, the application or the request is for

00:05:21.280 --> 00:05:31.660
 a historic landmark tax exemption per section 10.128 of the municipal code of ordinances.

00:05:31.660 --> 00:05:38.340
 A property that's designated as a historic site, again, this was designated already,

00:05:38.340 --> 00:05:46.000
 can submit an application if they are able to prove that they have spent more than $10,000

00:05:46.000 --> 00:05:53.420
 in restoration or maintenance improvements of said property, which they have, and they've

00:05:53.420 --> 00:06:02.220
 provided the staff with receipts for the following. They've provided receipts for the reframing

00:06:02.220 --> 00:06:11.300
 and interior remodeling by adding new sheet rocks and other remodeling items in the sides

00:06:11.300 --> 00:06:17.620
 of the house, and we've got some photos of those remodeling. They've also submitted additional

00:06:17.620 --> 00:06:27.120
 receipts, which you all should have received earlier today for additional work on the exterior

00:06:27.120 --> 00:06:34.420
 paint that they did on the house and also plumbing work that they did for the house

00:06:34.420 --> 00:06:45.780
 related to the washer and other hot water heater as well. The total amount that they

00:06:45.780 --> 00:06:55.540
 are submitting is 21,872, which far exceeds, again, the $10,000 minimum requirement for

00:06:55.540 --> 00:07:02.780
 the tax exemption applications. I'm not going to read all of this, but this is that section

00:07:02.780 --> 00:07:10.260
 of the Municipal Code of Ordinances speaks to what they are required to have. Again,

00:07:10.260 --> 00:07:15.660
 they obviously have to be a historic site, which they are, spend more than $10,000 for

00:07:15.660 --> 00:07:22.580
 permanent improvements and restoration. If and when they get this, eventually what will

00:07:22.580 --> 00:07:28.460
 happen is they will go to City Council if the Historic Landmark Commission finds it

00:07:28.460 --> 00:07:35.820
 in favor that they did spend the amount, and it is for the permanent restoration and improvement.

00:07:35.820 --> 00:07:42.380
 The City Council will then vote on this tax exemption, and they would obtain 50% of their

00:07:42.380 --> 00:07:50.220
 city taxes exempted from their tax bill every year for a period of 10 years. So that is

00:07:50.220 --> 00:07:56.540
 something that they are looking to do under this section of the code. The next few slides

00:07:56.540 --> 00:08:03.180
 are just photos of what was there before, some examples of the paneling that was there

00:08:03.180 --> 00:08:09.460
 and the restroom that's shown here. What they've done is basically done the sheetrock, brought

00:08:09.460 --> 00:08:20.460
 it up to code and standards related to the interior. Not much as far as any major work.

00:08:20.460 --> 00:08:25.820
 Obviously, there's some plumbing or tiling that was done, as you see here as the result

00:08:25.820 --> 00:08:32.260
 of the work that they did for this home. Some other areas that they've moved, just the second

00:08:32.260 --> 00:08:39.600
 floor bedrooms and loft areas. So you can see that the exterior, I'm sorry, the interior

00:08:39.600 --> 00:08:47.420
 has been improved as part of this work that they did for their house, for the house. The

00:08:47.420 --> 00:08:51.700
 current property owner actually bought the house recently. It was the previous owner

00:08:51.700 --> 00:08:58.180
 that did all the work, but the current owner is bringing forward this application. So again,

00:08:58.180 --> 00:09:05.220
 they've also, in addition to what we just saw, provided additional receipts for exterior

00:09:05.220 --> 00:09:11.540
 paint work that was done for the house. They've also re-piped the water, hot and cold, and

00:09:11.540 --> 00:09:17.540
 located a washer line and a new drain for the washer as part of the project that they

00:09:17.540 --> 00:09:22.220
 submitted for. And then also installed and relocated a water heater. So a lot of the

00:09:22.220 --> 00:09:32.860
 work is important in order for the house to remain, as in my opinion, as a historic structure,

00:09:32.860 --> 00:09:41.500
 which I believe this work would help in that effort. With that being said, staff is recommending

00:09:41.500 --> 00:09:48.340
 a favorable determination that the expenses presented has resulted in a permanent improvement

00:09:48.340 --> 00:09:56.980
 and a restoration of the historic landmark home located at 923 West Oak Street. That

00:09:56.980 --> 00:10:04.220
 concludes my presentation and we'll be happy to answer any question that you all may have.

00:10:04.220 --> 00:10:24.900
 Yes, ma'am. Mary, it's really hard to hear you. I'm sorry. Please unmute your microphone.

00:10:24.900 --> 00:10:36.380
 There you go. Okay. This house is right across the street from my house, quite literally,

00:10:36.380 --> 00:10:42.940
 and I saw it before. It was redone and I've seen it after. My question is, when were the

00:10:42.940 --> 00:10:50.940
 receipts, I thought I looked and saw receipts for 2005 and then a smaller amount for $4,000

00:10:50.940 --> 00:10:58.140
 recently when our whole sewer line went ballistic. And I wanted to have somebody interpret the

00:10:58.140 --> 00:11:04.180
 rules as to how far back we can go. When was this house landmarked? And because there's

00:11:04.180 --> 00:11:07.820
 a rule I saw that went flying up that said it can only apply to things from two years

00:11:07.820 --> 00:11:11.820
 ago. And I certainly want them to have this designation, but I also want to follow the

00:11:11.820 --> 00:11:20.700
 rules. Right. Let me pull up the staff report real quick. Yeah, I could do that. I can tell

00:11:20.700 --> 00:11:37.780
 you. And I just want to make sure I have the correct information. So the home was designated.

00:11:37.780 --> 00:11:52.900
 One second here. Hey, Ron, can you hear me? Yes. This is Chris Galanis, the property owner.

00:11:52.900 --> 00:11:58.940
 Hey, Chris. All the receipts. Hi, you guys. Hi, neighbor Mary. How are you doing, Chris?

00:11:58.940 --> 00:12:02.420
 Doing well. Hey, all the receipts I have in front of me, Ron, that I submitted to you

00:12:02.420 --> 00:12:10.100
 are from 2015 or later. So I don't have anything earlier than that. So yes. So Mary, you said

00:12:10.100 --> 00:12:13.940
 2005, but I'm looking at the designation. Yeah, I thought I saw five on the summer.

00:12:13.940 --> 00:12:24.420
 This home was in 2015 is when it was designated on May 5th to be specific. And so the work

00:12:24.420 --> 00:12:31.820
 followed in the summer. So again, it was designated May 5th, 2015. And the work followed in August

00:12:31.820 --> 00:12:37.220
 and July and August of that same year. So it was soon after. I think it was just done

00:12:37.220 --> 00:12:41.700
 with that September too. Yeah. Yeah, I got you now. The handwriting was just kind of

00:12:41.700 --> 00:12:50.900
 sloppy. Great. All right. Other questions? All right. If no other questions, anybody

00:12:50.900 --> 00:12:58.540
 want to make a motion? Lenny? It looks lovely. I was just unmuting myself, not really raising

00:12:58.540 --> 00:13:07.940
 my hand, but that's fine. I will make a motion that we approve HL200008. And can I have a

00:13:07.940 --> 00:13:15.500
 show of hands so it's easier to do? Do I have a second? I'm sorry. A second. Thanks, Katie.

00:13:15.500 --> 00:13:19.980
 And can we have any discussion for this? I think we have to do a discussion. Discussion?

00:13:19.980 --> 00:13:25.260
 All right. So if there's no discussion, can I have a vote? Everybody just put up your

00:13:25.260 --> 00:13:31.860
 hand so we can say all in favor, raise your hand. Let's see. That leaves out Melody. I

00:13:31.860 --> 00:13:39.180
 guess, oh wait, I have two of you. Oh, okay. Gotcha. All right. So all opposed? All right.

00:13:39.180 --> 00:13:44.580
 The motion carries unanimously. Thank you all. Sure. Do we miss Melody? Is she out?

00:13:44.580 --> 00:13:49.380
 No, no, she's there. It's just, she's got a voice on one and yeah, I know it took me

00:13:49.380 --> 00:13:58.140
 a second to. Madam Vice Chair, I didn't hear your vote. Oh, I'm sorry. I raised my, I did

00:13:58.140 --> 00:14:02.100
 raising my hand. I was unanimous. Yes. My apologies. That's right. I was doing hand

00:14:02.100 --> 00:14:07.020
 just because it was easier to count. I don't know everybody's voice so well. All right.

00:14:07.020 --> 00:14:17.580
 So the motion carries. All right. Let me move on to our next agenda item. COA 20-0010, hold

00:14:17.580 --> 00:14:23.380
 a public hearing and consider an application for a COA in accordance with section 2.9.2

00:14:23.380 --> 00:14:28.140
 of the Denton Development Code to replace existing porch flooring and steps leading

00:14:28.140 --> 00:14:34.580
 to the porch of 723 West Oak, a local historic landmark property located within the Oak Hickory

00:14:34.580 --> 00:14:38.820
 Historic District. The site is on the south side of Oak Street between Denton Street and

00:14:38.820 --> 00:14:44.660
 Welch Street. So Ron, are you, do you have a presentation? Okay. We do have, we do have

00:14:44.660 --> 00:14:58.980
 a presentation for this one. Let me find it real quick. Okay. So as introduced in the

00:14:58.980 --> 00:15:06.460
 introduction, it is for COA 20-10 and it is for an application for a COA to replace an

00:15:06.460 --> 00:15:18.900
 existing porch flooring. The property is located again in the Oak

00:15:18.900 --> 00:15:25.660
 Hickory Historic District. It is specifically 723 West Oak, not too far from where we were

00:15:25.660 --> 00:15:32.620
 just looking at the other application previously. The property is located again between Denton

00:15:32.620 --> 00:15:40.300
 and Welch Street as shown on this exhibit. This is a photo of the home. It is owned by

00:15:40.300 --> 00:15:48.780
 Roger and Helen Rikovsky is the last name. Close. It is a local historic landmark, another

00:15:48.780 --> 00:15:56.740
 historic landmark designated home and is referred to as the Lomax House, again, per our records.

00:15:56.740 --> 00:16:04.540
 A very lovely home located on Oak Street. What they are requesting, that is, is to replace

00:16:04.540 --> 00:16:11.620
 the porch flooring and steps. As you can see that the existing wood flooring has weathered

00:16:11.620 --> 00:16:17.860
 and has caused or is potentially going to cause some safety issues and therefore their

00:16:17.860 --> 00:16:25.780
 request is to replace it. These are some shots of what is there now. Additional sections

00:16:25.780 --> 00:16:33.660
 of the porch, as you can see, also seen some weathering and can potentially cause some

00:16:33.660 --> 00:16:43.260
 safety issues. Additional places where the wood flooring is shown extends all the way

00:16:43.260 --> 00:16:48.380
 around to the side of the home. So there is a lot of flooring that they are proposing

00:16:48.380 --> 00:16:54.580
 to redo or replace, including the steps as we mentioned earlier. These steps will be

00:16:54.580 --> 00:17:01.340
 replaced with the same material and then that material is what we have here. Initially when

00:17:01.340 --> 00:17:07.020
 they submitted this application, the applicant asked, you know, would this need to be approved

00:17:07.020 --> 00:17:17.300
 by the HLC and my immediate reaction was no. However, because the porch is also, it also

00:17:17.300 --> 00:17:24.380
 includes these steps and I feel that it is a very important decision. I wanted to bring

00:17:24.380 --> 00:17:31.580
 forward to the HLC for your consideration and therefore we have it here tonight or this

00:17:31.580 --> 00:17:38.460
 evening. A lot of the criteria for the historic district, the architectural requirements,

00:17:38.460 --> 00:17:42.500
 are provided in your staff report. However, I wanted to highlight a couple of places where

00:17:42.500 --> 00:17:49.140
 it speaks specifically to front entrances and porches and as you can see here, the main

00:17:49.140 --> 00:17:58.300
 thing is that the floor covering should not be carpet, which she is not. The style needs

00:17:58.300 --> 00:18:07.180
 to match and because this is of a, in my opinion, craftsman, the use of wood and the proposed

00:18:07.180 --> 00:18:16.500
 wood material in staff's opinion is complementary and consistent with the architectural style.

00:18:16.500 --> 00:18:22.300
 With that being said, staff is recommending approval of the COA to replace the porch flooring

00:18:22.300 --> 00:18:27.660
 and steps that lead to the porch for this subject property. With that, I will stand

00:18:27.660 --> 00:18:40.780
 for any questions. So I, oh, okay, it's Janelle. What was the material there? What's the specific

00:18:40.780 --> 00:18:52.460
 item? Let me pull it up real quick. And I believe the applicant may be here on the call

00:18:52.460 --> 00:18:58.860
 if he would like to chime in while I pull this up. Yes, I'm here. This is Roger Rykovsky

00:18:58.860 --> 00:19:11.060
 and the product we're proposing to use is Fiberon and it's a composite and it's a bungalow

00:19:11.060 --> 00:19:25.940
 color from the Good Life Escapes collection. Janelle, did that answer your question? I'm

00:19:25.940 --> 00:19:31.600
 looking at the staff report and there is more information related to the type of material,

00:19:31.600 --> 00:19:45.020
 but were you, did you get the answer you were looking for? Yes. Fiberon is the manufacturing

00:19:45.020 --> 00:19:59.400
 and it's composite boards. Are there other questions? Ah, Angie. So the composite board,

00:19:59.400 --> 00:20:12.300
 that does not mean wood or it is wood? It is not wood. I guess it's more, mine is more

00:20:12.300 --> 00:20:18.500
 of a comment. Did we not finally get around to approving fiberboard for house siding?

00:20:18.500 --> 00:20:25.660
 And is that somewhat similar to this only for floors, for decks? I know what you're

00:20:25.660 --> 00:20:31.940
 referring to Madam Chair. I believe the certain historic districts didn't approve that as

00:20:31.940 --> 00:20:38.500
 a potential use, but I'm mainly meant for siding versus flooring. So I remember that

00:20:38.500 --> 00:20:45.700
 discussion specifically meant for siding. So what are the rules then to be appropriate

00:20:45.700 --> 00:20:51.980
 for historic landmarks for flooring? Would it be to replace with wood? Is that what is

00:20:51.980 --> 00:20:56.540
 currently on the books? I don't remember. That's a little more detailed. Right. And

00:20:56.540 --> 00:21:02.060
 I try to provide the information that we have in our code in the staff report and again

00:21:02.060 --> 00:21:08.460
 back to the flooring front entrances and porches. When it talks about flooring and just talks

00:21:08.460 --> 00:21:16.580
 about carpet not permitted in that that's all that we have under the development code.

00:21:16.580 --> 00:21:23.140
 Of course, the intent is to replace with like for like. However, the image that you saw

00:21:23.140 --> 00:21:28.460
 that the applicant is proposing, again, this is just staff's recommendation in our opinion,

00:21:28.460 --> 00:21:34.940
 it does meet the intent of the architectural requirements. But again, this is something

00:21:34.940 --> 00:21:43.380
 that I want to bring forward to the HLC for your consideration. Angie. When we are we

00:21:43.380 --> 00:21:47.860
 open for discussion? Have we closed the public hearing? I think we need to have a motion

00:21:47.860 --> 00:21:54.620
 in order to close that. Don't we, Ron? I don't know if we need to have a motion. No,

00:21:54.620 --> 00:21:59.460
 then let us just close the discussion and then we can go. I mean, close the open meeting

00:21:59.460 --> 00:22:06.220
 and go to discussion. Can we do that? Yes. Okay, then let's close the meeting to go to

00:22:06.220 --> 00:22:14.700
 discussion. So Angie. My concern with this is because it's historic landmark property.

00:22:14.700 --> 00:22:20.020
 I feel like it needs to be like for like and that would be wood for wood. It's already

00:22:20.020 --> 00:22:25.580
 been deemed a landmark, a historic landmark property. And I think in order to keep that

00:22:25.580 --> 00:22:30.620
 designation, it needs to be like for like, either one or the other. Either if they're

00:22:30.620 --> 00:22:34.720
 going to go with that kind of composite and it's not going to be wood, then we take away

00:22:34.720 --> 00:22:41.180
 the historic landmark designation. But I feel like if it's going to stay that, it needs

00:22:41.180 --> 00:22:50.780
 to stay with wood. But the code doesn't require that. Well, it does a little. It's a gray

00:22:50.780 --> 00:23:00.460
 area. It is a gray area. It says like for like. And so that is the issue. I just wonder

00:23:00.460 --> 00:23:06.020
 if it's possible to make that which we can't see very much one form and then that which

00:23:06.020 --> 00:23:12.420
 is visible to the street another form. I understand the need to get away from wood. Fortunately,

00:23:12.420 --> 00:23:18.820
 many years ago, my house got made into cement for the porch. So I feel very lucky in a way.

00:23:18.820 --> 00:23:25.920
 And is there a way of making the decking of the porch fiber and then the front part that

00:23:25.920 --> 00:23:35.600
 exposed wood? I mean, just a question as our owner running around. Roger. Well, that probably

00:23:35.600 --> 00:23:41.860
 would be possible. However, most of the damage is done on the edge. And if it's going to

00:23:41.860 --> 00:23:52.020
 be remain a wood edge, that would. Yeah, that wouldn't help our problem. Can I see the picture

00:23:52.020 --> 00:23:56.820
 again? Maybe while you can show the pictures again, Ron, just to take a look. And while

00:23:56.820 --> 00:24:05.100
 that's going on, Janelle, you had a question. Yeah, I think, you know, the deck is a significant

00:24:05.100 --> 00:24:19.460
 part of what we see, you know, of this house from the pictures. And I think that, you know,

00:24:19.460 --> 00:24:26.300
 these are not cementuous boards. They're plastic. And, you know, it's wooden plastic infused

00:24:26.300 --> 00:24:35.820
 product. And they do look different. It has a nice look, but it has a plastic look. The

00:24:35.820 --> 00:24:43.780
 fiber fiber fiber. I mean, they are a good product, but they do not. It doesn't, you

00:24:43.780 --> 00:24:52.100
 know, it's not a good product. There's a shininess to it. It appears plastic because it's a that's

00:24:52.100 --> 00:25:00.660
 what it is. It's a composite wooden plastic. Ron, recently we talked, we approved a porch

00:25:00.660 --> 00:25:06.100
 on it was on Oak and I've forgotten the side street. Was it Denton? Did we specify what

00:25:06.100 --> 00:25:10.020
 kind of would they or what kind of material they should use for their porch? The grayish

00:25:10.020 --> 00:25:15.100
 blue house. I remember that's off the corner. I don't think we did. I think it was mainly

00:25:15.100 --> 00:25:22.060
 what was facing the street. The railing was what we focused on specifically, not the flooring

00:25:22.060 --> 00:25:28.620
 so I see your point that the flooring is not visible from the street. Therefore, it wasn't

00:25:28.620 --> 00:25:33.580
 the discussion with the HLC at that time. It was more the railing and the location of

00:25:33.580 --> 00:25:39.900
 the access and the color of the railing. Yes. Mary, I would like to add something if I may.

00:25:39.900 --> 00:25:45.620
 This is Evan. Yeah. So I'm looking at the appendix to the development code and appendix

00:25:45.620 --> 00:25:52.540
 A3655 says that original porch flooring or ceiling materials such as tongue and groove

00:25:52.540 --> 00:25:58.540
 planks, also known as center match strip flooring, should be preserved and retained wherever

00:25:58.540 --> 00:26:12.980
 possible or replaced. Wow. That I missed. Well, I do know that people have replaced

00:26:12.980 --> 00:26:18.580
 their porches in the neighborhood, the house across from me and next to the house that

00:26:18.580 --> 00:26:27.020
 just got this vote for tax abatement. What is it called? The razor house. I think the

00:26:27.020 --> 00:26:34.020
 razor house. They replaced theirs with Cypress wood because it would not rot. It was a long

00:26:34.020 --> 00:26:38.420
 time ago, I will grant you, but that's what they did and not much is even visible from

00:26:38.420 --> 00:26:48.300
 the street. I'm all for safety. That's why I'm kind of hemming and hawing over here because

00:26:48.300 --> 00:26:52.340
 that porch looks horrible. Right now, it looks like it's ready to fall a little bit in places.

00:26:52.340 --> 00:26:59.660
 Well, I mean, yeah, if it can't be replaced in kind. Evan, can you repeat that section

00:26:59.660 --> 00:27:14.780
 of the code that you were referencing? Sure. It's 8.3 subsection five. Appendix 8.3. Of

00:27:14.780 --> 00:27:37.740
 the Denton development code? Yes. Okay. Appendix 8.3 A subsection five. Thank you. My copy

00:27:37.740 --> 00:27:43.220
 was printed in 2018. I'm not positive if this is still current. Yeah, I think that we have

00:27:43.220 --> 00:27:50.260
 a new code in place and that's why I was assuming that it was not the current development code.

00:27:50.260 --> 00:27:56.020
 Our code was updated in 2019. So you may have an outdated one, but it doesn't mean that

00:27:56.020 --> 00:28:01.140
 it wasn't carried over. That's why I was trying to piece the places together if it was carried

00:28:01.140 --> 00:28:20.340
 over or not. Do you think I can find something more current? Have we found anything? Yeah.

00:28:20.340 --> 00:28:23.300
 I would just like to make the comment that I just think it's going to look substantially

00:28:23.300 --> 00:28:30.300
 different to go with the plastic composite product. I think there are, like Mary was

00:28:30.300 --> 00:28:35.780
 saying, there's Cyprus, there's other woods that are less likely to rot, but there's still

00:28:35.780 --> 00:28:43.260
 a wood and they're going to have more of that historical look and be more in keeping and

00:28:43.260 --> 00:28:49.260
 like for like because it really will be a substantially different look to go with the

00:28:49.260 --> 00:28:56.260
 composite boards. And I do know that the Cyprus has lasted at least 10 years. So if that's

00:28:56.260 --> 00:29:03.480
 any consolation, the price is probably similar. Yes, Angie. I'd like to also say, I'd like

00:29:03.480 --> 00:29:12.580
 to know why this house was deemed a local historic landmark. And I'm guessing here,

00:29:12.580 --> 00:29:17.860
 but I'm going to guess a lot of it had to do with that front porch. And that front porch

00:29:17.860 --> 00:29:24.340
 is, it's iconic, it's beautiful, but I think that that is probably one of the reasons that

00:29:24.340 --> 00:29:30.260
 it did. And so for us to now to kind of curtail that and allow it to go with a different material,

00:29:30.260 --> 00:29:41.460
 I just think jeopardizes that landmark, that distinction that it has.

00:29:41.460 --> 00:29:50.260
 Is there any more discussion? Have we found the porch? The original porch, when we moved

00:29:50.260 --> 00:29:56.100
 in in 1996, was in very poor shape. It was patched several times. We continued to patch

00:29:56.100 --> 00:30:03.460
 it over the years. It was a painted porch. We replaced the entire porch early this century.

00:30:03.460 --> 00:30:11.980
 And upon recommendation of a historic consultant, we tried staining it because wood grain was

00:30:11.980 --> 00:30:18.300
 appropriate for the period. That didn't work out. And so in the end, we ended up painting

00:30:18.300 --> 00:30:26.300
 it as well. It's been repaired within that time period. We've had two major repairs of

00:30:26.300 --> 00:30:33.860
 the porch itself due to rotting wood issues and buckling. And now it's in the state it

00:30:33.860 --> 00:30:40.620
 is. And so we were just trying to avoid any more of that or any more expense every 15

00:30:40.620 --> 00:30:52.200
 years or so. The look of it, we have a sample of the flooring, which I wasn't able to turn

00:30:52.200 --> 00:30:59.820
 in because of the COVID thing. But they said the pictures were good enough. In my opinion,

00:30:59.820 --> 00:31:06.100
 looking at the sample, it doesn't really have that plasticky look like I thought it might.

00:31:06.100 --> 00:31:11.940
 And I was happy with the appearance of it. And so I'm not sure that the photo really

00:31:11.940 --> 00:31:17.380
 you can tell from that. But I think it would look appropriate for the house. And we would

00:31:17.380 --> 00:31:25.180
 be happy with that. We are very concerned and involved with maintaining historic appropriateness

00:31:25.180 --> 00:31:33.620
 of the home inside and out. And we were happy with this decision and think it would be a

00:31:33.620 --> 00:31:38.980
 good choice. >> Also, all of the pictures that you may

00:31:38.980 --> 00:31:45.780
 see of the porch in the shape that it is at the moment give you a very good view of very

00:31:45.780 --> 00:31:54.820
 close up from above. The view from the street, which is so important for the historic commission,

00:31:54.820 --> 00:32:01.300
 is actually from much lower. Our porch is raised up. So the view from the street is

00:32:01.300 --> 00:32:06.860
 not the view that you see in those photos. Those are done in a way so that you can see

00:32:06.860 --> 00:32:16.020
 detail to make you more aware of what water damage does very quickly.

00:32:16.020 --> 00:32:24.500
 >> Do we know how much or what it would look like from the street?

00:32:24.500 --> 00:32:31.220
 >> You would not see the porch itself. You would see the steps. Just the risers basically.

00:32:31.220 --> 00:32:37.100
 You would not see the treads. But that would be it.

00:32:37.100 --> 00:32:41.820
 >> The house is elevated compared to the street view.

00:32:41.820 --> 00:32:47.260
 >> Janelle, while Ron is looking. >> I was going to put up the screen where

00:32:47.260 --> 00:32:53.780
 we have a shot of the house if that is something that the commission would like to see.

00:32:53.780 --> 00:33:03.940
 >> So we probably need -- we closed the public portion of this for discussion. So we think

00:33:03.940 --> 00:33:10.620
 we probably need to keep an answer to one applicant. >> Can you go back to one slide

00:33:10.620 --> 00:33:14.860
 back? Please, Ron. >> Sure.

00:33:14.860 --> 00:33:21.060
 >> Do you see -- I want to see how the detail of the porch, how the boards are going to

00:33:21.060 --> 00:33:28.020
 be exposed. Part of the look of the historic home is the way that they constructed the

00:33:28.020 --> 00:33:36.380
 porch. So you can see the one that is rotting and falling apart by that post. But you can

00:33:36.380 --> 00:33:40.700
 see how it is like a tongue and groove and they fit together. I know this is more recent

00:33:40.700 --> 00:33:45.540
 wood but that would have been how it was built. But also the thickness of that wood. I'm curious

00:33:45.540 --> 00:33:52.240
 like this new decking that they want to use, if it is thicker, if it is going to be detailed

00:33:52.240 --> 00:33:56.460
 in the same way where you have a little bit of the overhang as you have each individual

00:33:56.460 --> 00:34:04.680
 board coming out so that you see it. Because that is something that, you know, it is apparent.

00:34:04.680 --> 00:34:09.260
 You see it from the street even if you see that edge. You see that green trim board and

00:34:09.260 --> 00:34:15.740
 then you see the decking and there is a thickness to that wood. So it would just be nice to

00:34:15.740 --> 00:34:22.620
 see the detail. Like if these planks, if they are thicker, are they going to be overhanging

00:34:22.620 --> 00:34:29.620
 and, you know, stacked like that? Or how is their decking contractor planning to finish

00:34:29.620 --> 00:34:37.580
 that edge? Because are you just going to see the cut edge of the fiber on? It would just

00:34:37.580 --> 00:34:42.460
 be interesting to see how the detail is going to be played out to see if it would at least

00:34:42.460 --> 00:34:49.820
 look. Because that is going to look very different if they take off the green trim board and

00:34:49.820 --> 00:34:56.420
 put in this new product. And do you understand what I'm saying? Just like how that is detailed.

00:34:56.420 --> 00:35:01.220
 It is going to be important to maintain that historic look. Ron, did you have the other

00:35:01.220 --> 00:35:12.180
 picture? Sure. Now the picture of the decking. Because you see how on this decking, how it

00:35:12.180 --> 00:35:19.820
 comes, it lands. It lands into, you know, like they have got a piece like this and they

00:35:19.820 --> 00:35:25.100
 have got the pieces like this coming together. Yes. And then they have a second one that

00:35:25.100 --> 00:35:31.180
 turns down like at your front like this. As opposed to looking at myself on the camera

00:35:31.180 --> 00:35:34.860
 during this. As opposed to, you know, like the old fashioned way you just have all the

00:35:34.860 --> 00:35:42.780
 boards and you are seeing your ends, you know, protruding below the baluster. So I think

00:35:42.780 --> 00:35:49.220
 that I don't know if this can be finished in the same way. But I think that it would

00:35:49.220 --> 00:35:53.340
 make this is going to look very different because this is a very modern look. The way

00:35:53.340 --> 00:35:58.660
 that they finished this edge. And it is going to look very different than traditional, you

00:35:58.660 --> 00:36:03.520
 know, historic homes where you see just the planking. And the planking is coming out and

00:36:03.520 --> 00:36:07.900
 that adds to all the gingerbread and all the activity that you see going on on the front

00:36:07.900 --> 00:36:12.100
 of a house is to see each of those little bits of boards peeking out, creating kind

00:36:12.100 --> 00:36:21.780
 of like dentals along the front. So if they are able to, like if their deck, the installer

00:36:21.780 --> 00:36:25.900
 can kind of look at how that looks. You know, the thickness of these are often a little

00:36:25.900 --> 00:36:34.660
 bit thicker as well. I think that the original boards are probably maybe a little thinner.

00:36:34.660 --> 00:36:39.980
 So I think it would be just interesting to see how they plan to resolve all that. Those

00:36:39.980 --> 00:36:46.400
 are just some thoughts I have in terms of keeping it looking historic because, you know,

00:36:46.400 --> 00:36:50.900
 you can have a historic house that once you change all the materials and it becomes a

00:36:50.900 --> 00:36:55.740
 completely different animal. It is not a historic home anymore. It is not retaining the character

00:36:55.740 --> 00:37:00.780
 because you lose those details that were put in originally. That is part of what gives

00:37:00.780 --> 00:37:06.220
 it that feel. I think it is going to look totally different. I agree. I think it is

00:37:06.220 --> 00:37:11.060
 going to look very different. It is going to look totally different mostly because it

00:37:11.060 --> 00:37:16.100
 is not going to be painted. And that is something I don't want to do is to paint this because

00:37:16.100 --> 00:37:23.140
 I think it has a good look already. The installation of this product, there won't be end boards.

00:37:23.140 --> 00:37:30.100
 There will be one continuous long board on the edge and the boards will be laid similarly

00:37:30.100 --> 00:37:35.380
 with what has been installed with the current wood floor. But there will be like a trim

00:37:35.380 --> 00:37:44.740
 board with the same product so that the fiber on edges aren't showing to the street. It

00:37:44.740 --> 00:37:52.860
 will just be like the edge of a straight board. But that I think is the point, Roger, is that

00:37:52.860 --> 00:37:57.860
 I don't like the change of the look with the view to the street. Did I get everybody's

00:37:57.860 --> 00:38:03.940
 issue correctly, Janelle, Evan, and Angie? I think that is one of the major points of

00:38:03.940 --> 00:38:10.700
 that. So this is actually kind of closed, Roger, that it is kind of our discussion.

00:38:10.700 --> 00:38:15.940
 So we will have to wait unless we ask you a question, I believe. That is true. Ron?

00:38:15.940 --> 00:38:23.620
 So if we can hold off on the applicant unless the commission requests clarification or has

00:38:23.620 --> 00:38:29.060
 a question of the applicant. So is there other discussion? Does anybody else have anything

00:38:29.060 --> 00:38:39.780
 to add? If not, I would love to hear a motion. I move that we deny the application. Is there

00:38:39.780 --> 00:38:48.600
 a second? All right. Now it is open for discussion again for this motion. The motion is to deny

00:38:48.600 --> 00:38:54.100
 this application. Is there anybody that is on the commission that wishes to speak to

00:38:54.100 --> 00:39:02.420
 this? Does it make a difference whether we deny or could we delay and allow the homeowner

00:39:02.420 --> 00:39:13.420
 to seek perhaps Cypress to replace the wood or the nonwood that they are currently using

00:39:13.420 --> 00:39:21.100
 in terms of filing a new request and fees and all? Is that possible, Ron? It would be

00:39:21.100 --> 00:39:28.020
 -- if you deny this, it would be for the Fiberon composite material. Anything after that would

00:39:28.020 --> 00:39:32.860
 be in my opinion a significant difference or different application and they can submit

00:39:32.860 --> 00:39:39.140
 that next month if they wanted to. And what about the cost? There is no cost associated

00:39:39.140 --> 00:39:50.820
 with it. They would be able to submit as they did the first one. Okay. Other discussion?

00:39:50.820 --> 00:39:59.740
 If so, shall we vote? All those in favor of denying the certificate of appropriateness

00:39:59.740 --> 00:40:16.660
 for the Flex Tron porch deck, I think it is Fiberon porch decking on COA 20-0010. All

00:40:16.660 --> 00:40:27.500
 those in favor of denying that, please raise your hand so we can count. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

00:40:27.500 --> 00:40:34.860
 And all those -- I have to go to -- sorry, forgot to vote 6. All those opposed? All those

00:40:34.860 --> 00:40:41.220
 not agreeing. It is unanimous. Hopefully our applicant will come back again shortly so

00:40:41.220 --> 00:40:50.820
 we can get his deck fixed. Thank you for participating today. All right. Let me get grouped together.

00:40:50.820 --> 00:40:58.540
 Are we ready for our next one? Let me take a water break here for a second. All right.

00:40:58.540 --> 00:41:10.260
 So the next up is COA 20-0011 to hold a public hearing and consider an application for certificate

00:41:10.260 --> 00:41:15.860
 of appropriateness in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton development code to demolish

00:41:15.860 --> 00:41:22.380
 and remove an existing storm shelter at 1035 West Oak, a local historic landmark property

00:41:22.380 --> 00:41:27.540
 located within the Oak history district. The site is located on the southeast corner of

00:41:27.540 --> 00:41:33.780
 Oak Street and Welch Street. So, Ron, do you have a presentation? This is also better known

00:41:33.780 --> 00:41:45.540
 as the Evers House? Yes, we do. As introduced with the introduction, again, this is the

00:41:45.540 --> 00:41:52.420
 COA 20-0011. The proposal is to remove an existing storm shelter that is on the property

00:41:52.420 --> 00:42:01.540
 at 1035 West Oak. Again, within the Oak history district, similar south side of Oak between

00:42:01.540 --> 00:42:10.980
 Welch and Denton as previously seen in previous applications. The site is owned by Slaton

00:42:10.980 --> 00:42:19.140
 Realty Management LLC and the property is a locally historic landmark designation. And

00:42:19.140 --> 00:42:25.500
 as mentioned earlier by Madam Chair, it is often referred to as the Evers House. I don't

00:42:25.500 --> 00:42:30.420
 have an exact location of the storm shelter, but I'm guessing it's in this general vicinity

00:42:30.420 --> 00:42:37.060
 here since this is the only one that I was able to identify. Okay, appreciate that. So,

00:42:37.060 --> 00:42:44.680
 the applicant is requesting a demolition of the storm shelter and the next few slides

00:42:44.680 --> 00:42:52.340
 are just photos of the shelter itself. It is obviously made of concrete. There is, from

00:42:52.340 --> 00:42:56.620
 my understanding, from the applicant and the applicant hopefully is on the line and may

00:42:56.620 --> 00:43:03.700
 be able to elaborate at a later time. It has standing water. There is no drain that's on

00:43:03.700 --> 00:43:11.580
 the bottom. So, it's been an issue for them when it comes to the rain and the stagnant

00:43:11.580 --> 00:43:19.520
 of the water inside the storm shelter that is. The other item that they referenced was

00:43:19.520 --> 00:43:26.260
 that the steps are narrow and not safe and so not really conducive to acting as a storm

00:43:26.260 --> 00:43:36.860
 shelter as it was originally proposed. The applicant, again, my understanding from their

00:43:36.860 --> 00:43:43.320
 application is that they would remove the top three or four feet or maybe two or three

00:43:43.320 --> 00:43:50.380
 feet from the top and then fill the rest with dirt. Drill holes, I believe, in the bottom

00:43:50.380 --> 00:43:57.020
 of the storm shelter so that it would flow or drain appropriately. But fill the storm

00:43:57.020 --> 00:44:03.620
 shelter with dirt and just not have one on the property or at least this one as part

00:44:03.620 --> 00:44:10.300
 of their application. I'm just going to reference this. I'm not going to read it for the entire

00:44:10.300 --> 00:44:18.580
 T. It is just that any demolition of a building or structure, that is why the HLC is considering

00:44:18.580 --> 00:44:25.260
 this. We wanted to make sure that any demolition of any historic landmark, one within a historic

00:44:25.260 --> 00:44:32.300
 district, was presented to the Historic Landmark Commission for your consideration. The section

00:44:32.300 --> 00:44:39.980
 of the development code, section 292(d)(1), references any demolition or removal shall

00:44:39.980 --> 00:44:45.500
 consider the following. The state of repair of the building or structure, the existing

00:44:45.500 --> 00:44:53.980
 and/or potential usefulness, including economic usefulness of the building, the purpose behind

00:44:53.980 --> 00:44:58.020
 preserving the structure as a historic structure, and the character of the neighborhood and

00:44:58.020 --> 00:45:07.260
 all of the other factors it finds appropriate. These are the four that you must consider.

00:45:07.260 --> 00:45:13.500
 There are other considerations that you can certainly offer as part of your discussion.

00:45:13.500 --> 00:45:23.740
 Staff feels that the existing storm drain is not, I guess, is approvable for a removal

00:45:23.740 --> 00:45:33.140
 of the storm shelter. With that, staff will stand for any questions.

00:45:33.140 --> 00:45:46.500
 Janelle? Explain again. They're just drilling holes so it will drain and then filling, but

00:45:46.500 --> 00:45:50.900
 they'll leave the portion that's above. It looks like there were some shutters.

00:45:50.900 --> 00:45:56.940
 My understanding is that they will remove the concrete at least two to three feet below

00:45:56.940 --> 00:46:03.220
 the grade, and therefore it would be dirt. There will be, obviously, some of the remaining

00:46:03.220 --> 00:46:12.140
 structure below that two to three feet area. You won't see it. You won't see any of the

00:46:12.140 --> 00:46:14.180
 structure. They're taking up a level raised part in the

00:46:14.180 --> 00:46:15.180
 steps and everything. Correct.

00:46:15.180 --> 00:46:20.700
 They're just not pulling the whole thing out. Correct. Two to three feet below the ground

00:46:20.700 --> 00:46:26.860
 level and then filling the rest with dirt. Was that built at the time of the home or

00:46:26.860 --> 00:46:32.740
 when was the storm shelter installed? I tried researching that. In fact, I was not

00:46:32.740 --> 00:46:37.780
 successful in determining the structure, but I still felt that it was important for this

00:46:37.780 --> 00:46:41.660
 HLC or this commission to consider, but that is a good question. Unfortunately, I don't

00:46:41.660 --> 00:46:46.340
 have an answer. I have a little bit of information for that.

00:46:46.340 --> 00:46:51.020
 The information I have is does everybody remember Dorothy Bertine, the watercolorist who recently

00:46:51.020 --> 00:46:55.300
 passed away a couple of years ago? She painted beautiful pictures of homes that

00:46:55.300 --> 00:47:02.960
 no longer exist in Denton and in the historic district. At any rate, in her master's thesis,

00:47:02.960 --> 00:47:08.760
 she wrote about the history of the Evers house. I just have a couple of pieces. Her thesis

00:47:08.760 --> 00:47:18.100
 was published in 1975, but clearly she's relating it back to another time. Mrs. Lula Evers trip

00:47:18.100 --> 00:47:23.100
 remembers on another occasion how all the neighbors shared in the use of this cellar,

00:47:23.100 --> 00:47:30.900
 as well as the social life of the house. One day, when the unusual storms come up, all

00:47:30.900 --> 00:47:34.700
 of the family prepared to spend the night in the cellar only to find that it was already

00:47:34.700 --> 00:47:40.580
 full and some more people were waiting outside hoping to get inside. The storm shelter outside,

00:47:40.580 --> 00:47:47.220
 she went back to the house. It's been around before 1975 and she's doing the history that

00:47:47.220 --> 00:47:55.080
 Mrs. Lula Elvers trip was talking about her mother. This goes back many, many years ago.

00:47:55.080 --> 00:48:00.900
 This is in fact probably one of the first storm shelters in Denton. It is historically

00:48:00.900 --> 00:48:07.920
 significant and that I think is something we need to keep in mind. Also, I do believe

00:48:07.920 --> 00:48:15.700
 that this house is a registered Texas historic landmark. I think it was done in 2017. Therefore,

00:48:15.700 --> 00:48:20.100
 that has bearing on what we're going to talk about. Who was anybody had a? All right, Angie.

00:48:20.100 --> 00:48:27.900
 I have two questions. One is what are the dimensions of the storm shelter and has the

00:48:27.900 --> 00:48:34.300
 applicant looked into refurbishing, maybe waterproofing, because for what I've heard

00:48:34.300 --> 00:48:41.700
 is it was due to water there. Is it possible to waterproof it? And then the stairs being

00:48:41.700 --> 00:48:49.540
 narrow, that's true with every historic structure that we have. So, I get that that can't sway

00:48:49.540 --> 00:48:54.580
 me one way or the other. But the water issue is I would like to know if there was something.

00:48:54.580 --> 00:49:00.140
 Have they checked into any refurbishing? This is Charlie Slayton. I'm the homeowner and

00:49:00.140 --> 00:49:04.500
 I'm happy to address that. Just to make sure everybody can hear me. Can you hear my audio?

00:49:04.500 --> 00:49:09.860
 Yes. Okay, fantastic. Thank you. Yeah, I'm not sure to the prior question of what year

00:49:09.860 --> 00:49:16.380
 that shelter was put in. I know it's quite old. We've gone through a series of attempts

00:49:16.380 --> 00:49:23.100
 to try to keep that from flooding. Normally in Iran, I think you had a picture there of

00:49:23.100 --> 00:49:29.140
 the steps that looked out from that. You can see a water line associated with that that

00:49:29.140 --> 00:49:35.500
 goes probably up to about, you know, two to three feet below the surface level of the

00:49:35.500 --> 00:49:43.680
 stairs. So, it's unusable. And let's see if you can see that right there. If you look

00:49:43.680 --> 00:49:49.060
 about the third step down, you can see a line right there on the left-hand side of that

00:49:49.060 --> 00:49:54.540
 picture. That's where the water level gets to unless it's constantly pumped. And I've

00:49:54.540 --> 00:50:01.660
 worn out about three different sump pumps trying to keep that flooding from occurring.

00:50:01.660 --> 00:50:08.320
 Problematically, as you all well know, that you can't take and discharge flood water like

00:50:08.320 --> 00:50:13.420
 that into the storm sewer. Code doesn't allow you to do that. So, you have to put that out

00:50:13.420 --> 00:50:17.980
 into the yard or you actually have to put that onto the driveway. That water goes down

00:50:17.980 --> 00:50:25.820
 into the gutter and transitions to the south there on Welch Street because the closest

00:50:25.820 --> 00:50:35.940
 storm discharge is around the corner, right there on Welch. So, that pumping it creates

00:50:35.940 --> 00:50:40.380
 a hazard. A lot of water in the gutter down there and I've kind of cringed a couple of

00:50:40.380 --> 00:50:46.580
 times and I've tried to pump it down. We have talked to different people. I had a company

00:50:46.580 --> 00:50:54.500
 come in and actually do a fairly extensive renovation in the half basement that is underneath

00:50:54.500 --> 00:50:59.980
 the house, which now functions as a laundry room down there. We went ahead and we put

00:50:59.980 --> 00:51:07.140
 a lot of guttering down underneath the ground and put some pumps and all that in there.

00:51:07.140 --> 00:51:14.200
 It's about $3,000 or $4,000 a project for that laundry room. In conversations with them,

00:51:14.200 --> 00:51:20.940
 this is much lower and accumulates a lot more water. So, it would just be a constant recirculation

00:51:20.940 --> 00:51:25.260
 of groundwater through there. Those of you that have lived in that area longer than I

00:51:25.260 --> 00:51:30.460
 have, I don't know if this is a historic problem associated with the levels of groundwater

00:51:30.460 --> 00:51:38.220
 in that area or not, but we've seen a lot of flooding. So, in answer to your question,

00:51:38.220 --> 00:51:46.860
 we've taken a look at it. We consider it to be not resolvable as far as remediation of

00:51:46.860 --> 00:51:53.380
 the flooding to that issue. And not only understand the comment about the stairs, but if you can

00:51:53.380 --> 00:51:59.340
 also look over to the left-hand side of the left picture, you can see the rod associated

00:51:59.340 --> 00:52:03.700
 with the storm doors. We're going to do a set of storm doors about every year or two

00:52:03.700 --> 00:52:09.820
 on that because of the presence of the moisture underneath that. So, I consider it a flood

00:52:09.820 --> 00:52:18.580
 risk, a safety issue associated with the doors and the presence of water down there. You

00:52:18.580 --> 00:52:23.460
 all know that this house has been on the market now, and we've received negative comments

00:52:23.460 --> 00:52:28.580
 as well from people that have looked at the place as potential buyers that they considered

00:52:28.580 --> 00:52:29.580
 a nuisance.

00:52:29.580 --> 00:52:34.980
 Mr. Sleightman, are you a registered hydrologist about floodplains and things?

00:52:34.980 --> 00:52:35.980
 No.

00:52:35.980 --> 00:52:37.980
 Just an opinion then?

00:52:37.980 --> 00:52:38.980
 Yes.

00:52:38.980 --> 00:52:44.980
 I have never seen that area flood. I live about less than 200 yards from your house.

00:52:44.980 --> 00:52:49.140
 So, I've never seen that area flood. It would have been useful had you had pictures of the

00:52:49.140 --> 00:52:53.740
 water raising. I know the water table in Denton is high, but that part of the Evers house is

00:52:53.740 --> 00:52:57.620
 at least three or four feet above the street level. And I can assure you, Welch doesn't

00:52:57.620 --> 00:53:01.660
 flood, since I have lived there, unless we have about 10 inches in an hour. I've lived

00:53:01.660 --> 00:53:06.620
 there for 16 years. I have not noticed this. It would be helpful in your application if

00:53:06.620 --> 00:53:11.380
 you had reports from the people that you had done and detailed reports. This, I think,

00:53:11.380 --> 00:53:17.620
 is a very historic structure. And it is also, according to Denton County records, Melody,

00:53:17.620 --> 00:53:23.420
 you might correct me, but this is a registered Texas historic landmark. And therefore, any

00:53:23.420 --> 00:53:28.740
 changes actually have to come from that have to be approved by them before us. So, I think

00:53:28.740 --> 00:53:31.100
 we may be in the wrong spot altogether.

00:53:31.100 --> 00:53:37.780
 Are there any other comments? Yes, Cynthia?

00:53:37.780 --> 00:53:45.780
 Madam Vice Chair, I just wanted to ask that you ask the property owners their name and

00:53:45.780 --> 00:53:50.700
 address and invite them to speak. A couple of them have jumped into the meeting. And

00:53:50.700 --> 00:53:55.380
 I just want to make sure that everyone that's listening to the meeting knows who's speaking.

00:53:55.380 --> 00:54:01.620
 Mr. Slayton, are you still online and can you speak to giving your full name and address?

00:54:01.620 --> 00:54:08.340
 Yes, most certainly. Charles Slayton and my address is 103 5 West Oak Street.

00:54:08.340 --> 00:54:11.940
 You live on Oak right now? It's my primary residence, yes.

00:54:11.940 --> 00:54:18.620
 Gee, I never see your realm. Sorry.

00:54:18.620 --> 00:54:21.020
 I have a question, another question.

00:54:21.020 --> 00:54:28.700
 Yes, please. I'm sorry. Angie. So I would like to know if the flooding and that is from

00:54:28.700 --> 00:54:34.460
 groundwater going into it, or is it groundwater coming up from underneath?

00:54:34.460 --> 00:54:42.060
 Yeah, happy to tell you what the folks told me on the basement over at the main house

00:54:42.060 --> 00:54:50.380
 is they said that it was based on groundwater coming up from the bottom and and infiltrating

00:54:50.380 --> 00:54:53.440
 in that in that way. So you don't know if that's what's happening

00:54:53.440 --> 00:54:58.860
 in this store shelter. That's what's happening in the basement. I need to know what's causing

00:54:58.860 --> 00:55:05.040
 the water and what we are discussing here today, which is the storm shelter.

00:55:05.040 --> 00:55:09.640
 It's it's it's my opinion. And I don't have a hydrologist to verify that. But it's my

00:55:09.640 --> 00:55:14.900
 opinion that it's groundwater that's infiltrating into the into the basement.

00:55:14.900 --> 00:55:18.500
 Groundwater from the top, not from the bottom. From underneath. I'm sorry, groundwater would

00:55:18.500 --> 00:55:22.900
 be underneath. Yeah, underneath. OK, Janelle.

00:55:22.900 --> 00:55:31.260
 Yes, I just was curious. I would, you know, if if they got further information and there

00:55:31.260 --> 00:55:38.380
 was a problem with the the cellar and groundwater, I don't understand how that would require

00:55:38.380 --> 00:55:43.140
 the removal of the upper portion. But I think you could definitely probably fill in the

00:55:43.140 --> 00:55:49.060
 basement and retain that exterior that kind of adds to that, you know, the old school

00:55:49.060 --> 00:55:55.040
 look. So I was wondering if there was another reason that you plan to remove the entire

00:55:55.040 --> 00:55:59.060
 entrance and indoors other than just the doors requiring maintenance.

00:55:59.060 --> 00:56:10.580
 Would you like for me to answer that? Yes, I think that. Oh, OK, certainly. The the approach

00:56:10.580 --> 00:56:18.140
 to the demolition was recommended by the contractor who took a look at that. There's no real reason

00:56:18.140 --> 00:56:26.300
 not to to to take that out. And I've I'm in the health care business. We do hospitals

00:56:26.300 --> 00:56:31.900
 and I've demolished hospital sites before and basements. And normally what one does,

00:56:31.900 --> 00:56:37.420
 if there's not a plan to rebuild on that site, you just go ahead and knock the sidewalls

00:56:37.420 --> 00:56:42.660
 down into the bottom and fill it on top. Now, doing that precludes your ability to build

00:56:42.660 --> 00:56:47.620
 on top of that anymore. So that's not that you would ever build on top of that, that

00:56:47.620 --> 00:56:54.180
 location for that storm cellar. But it's just the approach that was recommended by the contractor.

00:56:54.180 --> 00:56:58.500
 I don't have any problem with filling it in. I think that would eliminate the flood risk

00:56:58.500 --> 00:57:05.220
 and it would probably eliminate any safety concerns as well.

00:57:05.220 --> 00:57:13.140
 Do we have any further questions for the applicant? If not, should we close this meeting and open

00:57:13.140 --> 00:57:28.100
 our own discussion? No. Right. Lenny, I can't hear you. You're muted. Can't hear you, Lenny.

00:57:28.100 --> 00:57:34.300
 I said I think that would be appropriate. Thank you. If so, let's close the meeting

00:57:34.300 --> 00:57:42.180
 and then we can go on to some discussions. Anybody on the commission have anything to

00:57:42.180 --> 00:57:55.980
 discuss now? If not, do we have a motion? Go ahead. Let's see. Let's do Evan. Yes. Sure.

00:57:55.980 --> 00:58:00.860
 I like the idea of preserving the exterior. I mean, you can't see it from the street though.

00:58:00.860 --> 00:58:04.540
 I just pulled it up on Google street view and I looked at it from every angle and I

00:58:04.540 --> 00:58:07.860
 go down that street all the time. I've got a close friend who lives over there and I

00:58:07.860 --> 00:58:12.500
 I've never noticed the storm shelter, but I think there is some interest in maintaining

00:58:12.500 --> 00:58:17.020
 the exterior. I don't see any reason to maintain the interior. I think if that's filled in

00:58:17.020 --> 00:58:21.700
 that's fine. I actually went by today. One of the reasons I was a couple of minutes later

00:58:21.700 --> 00:58:25.980
 than I should have been and you can see the little whirligigs from the outside. I could

00:58:25.980 --> 00:58:31.940
 see it. And now maybe I ride in a truck and the meeting is closed, Mr. Slayton. You can

00:58:31.940 --> 00:58:35.780
 see it from at least from my truck. I can see the top of it. I knew where it was. If

00:58:35.780 --> 00:58:41.340
 you walk by, you can see even better because there's a low fence. Anybody else? I thought

00:58:41.340 --> 00:58:54.740
 I saw Janelle have a question. Comment. No. Angie. I'm torn with this because of the water

00:58:54.740 --> 00:59:02.020
 risk that it could it's it's hazardous. It could be dangerous. We don't have authority

00:59:02.020 --> 00:59:08.420
 to tell them what type of door to put on that storm shelter. If there's water coming up,

00:59:08.420 --> 00:59:16.140
 it could be hazardous to children. I am wondering though if they have not waterproofed it. If

00:59:16.140 --> 00:59:23.340
 they had and it still didn't work, I definitely would go with it. The demolition, but not

00:59:23.340 --> 00:59:27.820
 knowing that they've all they've done is pumped water out. I don't know if they've done anything

00:59:27.820 --> 00:59:35.060
 to keep the water out. That's my concern with it. But to your point, Madam Chair, I'm wondering

00:59:35.060 --> 00:59:41.860
 about this Texas designation if we even have authority to rule on it. My understanding

00:59:41.860 --> 00:59:49.300
 is state overrules county overrule city so that they can't go ahead with demolition until

00:59:49.300 --> 00:59:55.260
 the state approves it, I think. So irregardless of what we choose. So I think that unless

00:59:55.260 --> 01:00:12.480
 I'm wrong, Ron. Ron, you're muted. Ron, you're muted. Sorry. Mary did mention this to me

01:00:12.480 --> 01:00:18.860
 earlier today and I tried to research that reached out to our Texas Local Landmark Commission.

01:00:18.860 --> 01:00:24.580
 I haven't gotten a response. But if anything happens today, for example, if it was approved,

01:00:24.580 --> 01:00:32.020
 we will make sure that the Texas Local Texas Landmark Commission will have to provide their

01:00:32.020 --> 01:00:37.880
 approval or consideration before we issue any demolition permit to make sure that they

01:00:37.880 --> 01:00:44.860
 are aware and have made the approval of this subject application. If not, then obviously

01:00:44.860 --> 01:00:50.420
 we would not issue any demolition permit. Melody, I believe it's on the county record

01:00:50.420 --> 01:00:55.700
 that is a registered historic Texas Historic Landmark. You're on the County Historic Commission,

01:00:55.700 --> 01:01:05.980
 aren't you? I am. And it is. And it is. So I'm not wrong.

01:01:05.980 --> 01:01:14.880
 Because it is an outbuilding, I would have to take a look at what the requirements are.

01:01:14.880 --> 01:01:24.980
 And I can, it's worth a call to THC to find out how that chain would work because it has

01:01:24.980 --> 01:01:30.700
 dual designation. I would certainly, is there other discussion?

01:01:30.700 --> 01:01:37.840
 I would entertain a motion. Lenny? I was just going to ask if we can ask the

01:01:37.840 --> 01:01:46.100
 applicant, has he waterproofed? So we at least know what the answer to that question is.

01:01:46.100 --> 01:01:50.700
 Mr. Slayton? Yes, it has not been waterproofed. And the

01:01:50.700 --> 01:01:57.300
 reason that I had not done that is that the people that advised me, I asked that same

01:01:57.300 --> 01:02:06.220
 question on the basement next door that several feet higher. What I was told was that waterproofing

01:02:06.220 --> 01:02:11.940
 doesn't actually work in that circumstance, that you have to put sump pumps and so forth

01:02:11.940 --> 01:02:16.660
 down in there because you can't prevent the water from seeping up due to hydrostatic pressure

01:02:16.660 --> 01:02:21.220
 through the cracks in the thing. So no, we did not try that. That was just based on prior

01:02:21.220 --> 01:02:28.700
 advice. Off on another question. I'm just a little concerned with the lack of background

01:02:28.700 --> 01:02:35.020
 and a lot of opinions going on. It greatly concerns me that we don't have any of this

01:02:35.020 --> 01:02:39.900
 information in front of us. I don't know how you all feel, but I don't have that in front

01:02:39.900 --> 01:02:46.780
 of me. Anybody else? Anybody have comments, questions?

01:02:46.780 --> 01:02:55.820
 I was just going to say that regardless of the state and county decision to approve or

01:02:55.820 --> 01:03:02.500
 not overriding ours, I don't think there's anything that actually prohibits us from ruling

01:03:02.500 --> 01:03:07.860
 on it. Maybe not, but I hope that the final say,

01:03:07.860 --> 01:03:13.260
 if it is a registered Texas Historic Landmark, that nothing gets granted no matter what we

01:03:13.260 --> 01:03:31.820
 say until they have their say. I do think it's worthwhile to research this

01:03:31.820 --> 01:03:41.380
 a little bit more because we don't want to get into any confusion as to its designation

01:03:41.380 --> 01:03:47.740
 and who covers what on the property. Does that make sense?

01:03:47.740 --> 01:03:52.980
 Yes, and I think a little more detail on what has been done and what has been reported would

01:03:52.980 --> 01:04:01.460
 be quite useful. Because I just keep hearing opinions on the

01:04:01.460 --> 01:04:05.940
 current laundry room, by the way. That's really what I'm hearing. And hey, it made it into

01:04:05.940 --> 01:04:10.100
 a laundry room, so that might happen, Janille. So are we ready to make a motion?

01:04:10.100 --> 01:04:14.180
 Oh sure, I'm ready any time. Okay. I don't know if I can get this right.

01:04:14.180 --> 01:04:21.860
 I motion that we put this aside for now and have further information as to who's got jurisdiction

01:04:21.860 --> 01:04:30.500
 first, the other historical commissions, the county and the state, and that the applicant

01:04:30.500 --> 01:04:36.220
 maybe comes back with a little more information on more technical information that was requested

01:04:36.220 --> 01:04:42.620
 by some of the members. Evan, can we do that, Ron?

01:04:42.620 --> 01:04:49.260
 Can we do that, Cynthia? Madam Vice Chair, could I ask the commissioner

01:04:49.260 --> 01:04:52.820
 a question? Are you asking to postpone it to the next meeting?

01:04:52.820 --> 01:04:58.860
 Yes. Okay. So the motion on the floor is to postpone

01:04:58.860 --> 01:05:08.420
 COA 20-0010 in order to find out who has priority on the call of whether this is possible, and

01:05:08.420 --> 01:05:13.380
 two, to give the applicant an opportunity to supply sufficient background information

01:05:13.380 --> 01:05:18.860
 so that we can make an intelligent decision, not based on opinion, but based on facts.

01:05:18.860 --> 01:05:24.500
 All right. So are we having any discussion on this?

01:05:24.500 --> 01:05:29.220
 I think we need a second. Evan seconded it.

01:05:29.220 --> 01:05:32.860
 Oh, okay. If not, are we ready for a vote?

01:05:32.860 --> 01:05:37.500
 Please do so by hand and/or voice. All those in favor of Janelle's thing, raise

01:05:37.500 --> 01:05:44.140
 your hand. All right. Let's see. And all those opposed?

01:05:44.140 --> 01:05:48.820
 Okay. It is unanimous. We vote to postpone this to the next meeting.

01:05:48.820 --> 01:05:52.740
 Thank you, Mr. Slayton, for coming before. We'll look forward to seeing you in your August

01:05:52.740 --> 01:05:54.900
 or September. I don't know when the next meeting actually is.

01:05:54.900 --> 01:05:58.340
 It'll be August. Okay. It'll be in August. All right. Thank

01:05:58.340 --> 01:06:03.940
 you. All right. Now we are moving on to -- hang on.

01:06:03.940 --> 01:06:12.940
 All right. Our next agenda item is COA 20-0012. Hold a public hearing and consider an application

01:06:12.940 --> 01:06:19.620
 for certificate of appropriateness in accordance to section 2.9.2 of the debt and development

01:06:19.620 --> 01:06:25.300
 code to add a balcony access and railing at 607 Pearl Street, a local historic landmark

01:06:25.300 --> 01:06:30.380
 property located when the Oak history -- Oak Hickory Historic District. The site is located

01:06:30.380 --> 01:06:34.200
 on the south side of Pearl between Denton and Carroll Boulevard.

01:06:34.200 --> 01:06:36.620
 It's -- yes. Well, you might want to take a look at it.

01:06:36.620 --> 01:06:40.540
 So it's about adding this. I think Ron will take it over.

01:06:40.540 --> 01:06:45.860
 This is also, I believe, a registered Texas historic landmark, if I am not mistaken. Melody,

01:06:45.860 --> 01:06:56.020
 you might tell me, but I think it was registered in 2016. Ron?

01:06:56.020 --> 01:07:03.740
 Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, this property, 607 Pearl Street, is also a Texas registered

01:07:03.740 --> 01:07:14.140
 historic landmark. The subject application for this COA is to add a railing to facilitate

01:07:14.140 --> 01:07:21.020
 the use of a balcony on the property. As indicated in the introduction, it is within the Oak

01:07:21.020 --> 01:07:29.780
 Hickory Historic District. And the exact location is at 607 West -- sorry, Pearl Street. And

01:07:29.780 --> 01:07:36.100
 you can see it by the red identification. It's between Denton and Carroll Boulevard.

01:07:36.100 --> 01:07:43.740
 This is a view from the street of the home. It is currently owned by David Gray. In addition

01:07:43.740 --> 01:07:49.500
 to a Texas local landmark, it's also a locally designated historic landmark and is referred

01:07:49.500 --> 01:07:59.380
 to as the Simmons-Maxwell House. The applicant is proposing to add railing, as you see here,

01:07:59.380 --> 01:08:07.500
 in the two shots. The first one to the left is the existing, and then to the right is

01:08:07.500 --> 01:08:12.980
 to show what the additional railing would look like if it were to be constructed. This

01:08:12.980 --> 01:08:20.940
 is just a rendering of what that top railing would look like. This is a view of the roof

01:08:20.940 --> 01:08:30.020
 balcony on top of itself. Again, the railings would be along the pillars that you see there

01:08:30.020 --> 01:08:36.820
 or the wall that you see there. And again, it would be a black iron railing to provide

01:08:36.820 --> 01:08:43.620
 the additional safety as this balcony is used.

01:08:43.620 --> 01:08:52.300
 The access to the balcony itself will be from the window shown here on this photo. The door

01:08:52.300 --> 01:08:59.300
 will be coming off of a window -- I'm sorry -- a office, I believe. And the replacement

01:08:59.300 --> 01:09:09.380
 of the window will be of a door. And again, the exterior door will be similar as the existing

01:09:09.380 --> 01:09:18.060
 window -- I'm sorry -- doors that are within the house or on the house.

01:09:18.060 --> 01:09:23.280
 The development code does provide architectural requirements as it relates to the Ok-Korea

01:09:23.280 --> 01:09:28.940
 Historic District when it talks about architectural details, any additions, and then the use of

01:09:28.940 --> 01:09:36.820
 color. As stated earlier, the intent is to have the door be consistent with the doors

01:09:36.820 --> 01:09:43.580
 that are currently in the house. The only consideration I would like the Historic Landmark

01:09:43.580 --> 01:09:50.740
 Commission to consider is that the black railing, iron black railing, would be something new

01:09:50.740 --> 01:09:58.140
 to the proposed home. Also, in addition to some of the other architectural requirements,

01:09:58.140 --> 01:10:04.580
 we do have specific windows and doors. And as already stated, the style, the size, the

01:10:04.580 --> 01:10:11.260
 frames, and the openings will be consistent with the existing doors that the home has.

01:10:11.260 --> 01:10:16.780
 And so with that, staff has reviewed this certificate of appropriateness and is recommending

01:10:16.780 --> 01:10:24.340
 approval of the balcony access and railing at 607 Pearl Street. With that, staff will

01:10:24.340 --> 01:10:32.460
 stand for any questions. So much like the last agenda item, it doesn't

01:10:32.460 --> 01:10:38.740
 matter what we vote. We'll have to go through the state ultimately, correct?

01:10:38.740 --> 01:10:44.100
 Exactly. Yes. My intent was to provide this information

01:10:44.100 --> 01:10:49.460
 to the applicant. Mary did mention this to me this morning. With that, if whatever the

01:10:49.460 --> 01:10:56.180
 commission decides, any alteration permit, we'll need to wait after a decision has been

01:10:56.180 --> 01:11:06.900
 made by the Texas Landmark Commission. So that will be needed prior to any alteration

01:11:06.900 --> 01:11:13.820
 permits issued by the city. Can we vote now and withhold the permit until

01:11:13.820 --> 01:11:21.140
 they've gotten their other approvals? That is my hope. We certainly can do that.

01:11:21.140 --> 01:11:26.860
 I'm going to maybe ask our legal department. We can certainly put a condition that the

01:11:26.860 --> 01:11:36.980
 approval of the COA is pending or is dependent on the approval of the Texas Landmark Commission.

01:11:36.980 --> 01:11:44.700
 So this faces the street. This railing faces Pearl. Is that correct?

01:11:44.700 --> 01:11:48.940
 Correct. Let me share my screen again. I just want to make sure I've got all the

01:11:48.940 --> 01:11:55.060
 facts before I go on. And I wish we had a view of the side of the house. And is the

01:11:55.060 --> 01:11:59.300
 applicant present? Mr. McRae?

01:11:59.300 --> 01:12:04.060
 Yes. This is David McRae. I guess I would like to know, are there not

01:12:04.060 --> 01:12:11.260
 other windows and things on the side? Because that window to door conversion is likely to

01:12:11.260 --> 01:12:17.180
 be visible because of the height and where this house is from quite a distance. And is

01:12:17.180 --> 01:12:23.740
 that really a balcony or is that a roof? Today it's a roof. They've used it previously

01:12:23.740 --> 01:12:29.420
 as a balcony, but I don't know if I would. That's the reason we had someone come in and

01:12:29.420 --> 01:12:34.020
 look at it, because I'm not sure I would consider it a balcony and I would want it to be reinforced

01:12:34.020 --> 01:12:37.060
 before we'd use it that way.

01:12:37.060 --> 01:12:38.060
 Angie?

01:12:38.060 --> 01:12:46.660
 This is Evan. I encourage all of us to make more use of Google Street View. I'm going

01:12:46.660 --> 01:12:51.580
 back up and down the street looking at this from different angles. And it looks like that

01:12:51.580 --> 01:12:58.580
 area is very shrouded by trees. I don't think it's going to be easy for people to notice

01:12:58.580 --> 01:13:05.780
 that there's a railing there. The house is kind of raised up and the neighboring house

01:13:05.780 --> 01:13:08.140
 has so many trees.

01:13:08.140 --> 01:13:13.580
 Trees do not last forever, Evan. Trees come and go. 100 year old trees have gone down

01:13:13.580 --> 01:13:18.540
 in storms. So I don't want to use that as our excuse or as our reason to give it. The

01:13:18.540 --> 01:13:25.100
 question is, is it historically appropriate to do this, both the color, the railing, the

01:13:25.100 --> 01:13:32.220
 changing of the window to a door? And my question for the applicant is, how high is that wall

01:13:32.220 --> 01:13:33.580
 on this roof?

01:13:33.580 --> 01:13:43.540
 I would have to measure it again. But my guess is it's about three feet maybe. I can measure

01:13:43.540 --> 01:13:47.820
 that again. But we did have someone come and look at it. And what they wanted to do for

01:13:47.820 --> 01:13:53.820
 the railing was just to make sure it was within code to bring that up high enough for whatever

01:13:53.820 --> 01:13:54.820
 the code was.

01:13:54.820 --> 01:13:56.820
 And what is the code? How high will this railing be?

01:13:56.820 --> 01:14:03.140
 There would have been an additional, I think it was between 12 and 14 inches over the current

01:14:03.140 --> 01:14:11.020
 walls. And they were going to, their suggestion was to basically, the inside of the wall where

01:14:11.020 --> 01:14:15.860
 you see now where it's kind of covered with roofing material, that they would make it

01:14:15.860 --> 01:14:23.980
 a stucco material that would match the outside of the house as it is today.

01:14:23.980 --> 01:14:28.780
 Okay. So my question for you, Angie, I'll get your next online, is if you're going to

01:14:28.780 --> 01:14:33.380
 raise it 12 to 14 inches, the way you're showing this is certainly large enough for a small

01:14:33.380 --> 01:14:37.100
 child or a large adult to just slither right through. So I don't know where the safety

01:14:37.100 --> 01:14:44.020
 exactly is. I don't think we have enough detail about that railing. And the color is questionable

01:14:44.020 --> 01:14:45.860
 based on the house. Angie?

01:14:45.860 --> 01:14:51.660
 Well, my question was that. It looks like a metal black railing does not go with the

01:14:51.660 --> 01:14:59.300
 architectural design of the home. Well, I think that could be so cool to have that and,

01:14:59.300 --> 01:15:03.500
 you know, to have a door and to have a balcony there. I mean, I think that would be really

01:15:03.500 --> 01:15:12.420
 neat to do. But I'm not, I just think looking at that railing to me really detracts from

01:15:12.420 --> 01:15:18.140
 the architecture. Is there, have you looked at other types of railing that could go in

01:15:18.140 --> 01:15:24.420
 with the architecture design of the house? Has there been other material looked at? I'm

01:15:24.420 --> 01:15:30.500
 not sold on that one, but I am sold on making it a balcony. I think that's a cool idea.

01:15:30.500 --> 01:15:31.500
 Or a setback.

01:15:31.500 --> 01:15:40.540
 I'm sorry. I, yeah, we did look and also consider wood, which I would be fine with, actually.

01:15:40.540 --> 01:15:47.940
 That would be a preference of mine. The contractor that we had to come in to give us the estimate.

01:15:47.940 --> 01:15:52.740
 His recommendation was this because of the strength of the coupling and the length of

01:15:52.740 --> 01:15:57.220
 the railing that went across the, I guess that's the east side, which is the majority

01:15:57.220 --> 01:16:02.060
 of the balcony. That he was saying that was, this would provide more stability. But my,

01:16:02.060 --> 01:16:08.700
 I would, I'm, either one would work for me. And if we did the wood, if I can get it to

01:16:08.700 --> 01:16:13.220
 work, then we could do the wood and provide the stability, then it can be the same color

01:16:13.220 --> 01:16:15.780
 as the house.

01:16:15.780 --> 01:16:25.500
 Okay. There we go. Unmute. I was going to say, I don't object to the balcony. I do object

01:16:25.500 --> 01:16:31.020
 to the humeral. And I do think that I would get somebody, I would get, you know, a consultant

01:16:31.020 --> 01:16:35.180
 or something that, you know, beyond just the contractor, there are so many options that

01:16:35.180 --> 01:16:41.180
 you could do that would match the style and, you know, be simple and not detract from the

01:16:41.180 --> 01:16:45.860
 house. You could also paint the, the metal to match the color of the house. So it just

01:16:45.860 --> 01:16:50.620
 kind of disappears. I mean, there's, there's a lot of things that you can do for that additional

01:16:50.620 --> 01:16:59.380
 handrail that would not detract from the home. But I do think the black pipe railing is,

01:16:59.380 --> 01:17:04.660
 is, is really, it's, it's not a good, it's not a good solution. And I think wood would

01:17:04.660 --> 01:17:09.940
 similarly not necessarily be a good solution, but, you know, the house itself is plastered.

01:17:09.940 --> 01:17:15.020
 You could raise a little portion of the parapet at the back. I would just, I would take a

01:17:15.020 --> 01:17:20.260
 little bit more look at what your options really are, because there's, I mean, even

01:17:20.260 --> 01:17:25.580
 if you did metal, like I said, you could do a decorative metal and it could be painted

01:17:25.580 --> 01:17:30.980
 to match. There's just, there's a lot more options. And I think what's shown, it looks

01:17:30.980 --> 01:17:36.580
 like, like not, not the, it doesn't have the thought put into it yet, but that you, you

01:17:36.580 --> 01:17:45.580
 know, keep it historical. It's such a lovely home. Yeah. And I don't think it would have

01:17:45.580 --> 01:17:51.820
 a great expense to, to just do, even have somebody consult, you know, like get a designer

01:17:51.820 --> 01:17:56.780
 to give you a quick consultation. Historical person. Historical, yeah. You know, somebody

01:17:56.780 --> 01:18:05.220
 could give you a recommendation that would save you some time down the line. Other questions,

01:18:05.220 --> 01:18:14.860
 comments, questions for the applicant. There's no further questions or comments. And I didn't

01:18:14.860 --> 01:18:23.580
 ask and I forgot Cynthia. Mr. McRae, your address is? 607 Pearl Street. Yes. And your full name?

01:18:23.580 --> 01:18:28.660
 David McRae. Thank you. I'm sorry. I just needed to do that for legal reasons. Is there

01:18:28.660 --> 01:18:33.420
 any more questions? If not, can we close this to, to make it a closed meeting now and have

01:18:33.420 --> 01:18:40.460
 any discussions or no discussion emotion? Madam chair, if I can interject real quick,

01:18:40.460 --> 01:18:49.140
 just mention that there are two responses or comments that were submitted to the commission

01:18:49.140 --> 01:18:55.040
 prior to the meeting from two individuals. I believe most, or all of you hopefully have

01:18:55.040 --> 01:18:59.300
 received that. I just want to make sure that you are aware and that was something that

01:18:59.300 --> 01:19:06.220
 you had? I had seen those two. I do know where one of the individuals lives. I don't know

01:19:06.220 --> 01:19:12.500
 where the other lives and how that relates to this particular project. Neither, as far

01:19:12.500 --> 01:19:15.980
 as I know, neither one of them look directly at the house. They're just friends and it's

01:19:15.980 --> 01:19:19.540
 nice that they have great friends that love them and think they're great neighbors. I

01:19:19.540 --> 01:19:24.140
 think the same of my neighbors, but that I think is not relevant to the issue at hand.

01:19:24.140 --> 01:19:27.940
 Their comments just weren't relevant. That's fine. I just want to make sure that that was

01:19:27.940 --> 01:19:34.620
 part of it. That there were there, that it was some, it was Angie and Angie Williams,

01:19:34.620 --> 01:19:40.820
 I think. And Billy, maybe it was Billy Williams and Angie. I'm sorry. I don't remember who

01:19:40.820 --> 01:19:52.020
 it was now. I looked and I even, I'm sorry. I don't actually remember who it was. I mean,

01:19:52.020 --> 01:20:03.900
 let me pull it up real quick. Right. I had it and I've seemingly lost it. Billy Matthews

01:20:03.900 --> 01:20:11.380
 and who is this? And who? Billy and Angie Matthews. So that's one, that's one, actually

01:20:11.380 --> 01:20:17.300
 just one home. Okay. Yeah, they both said that they just liked the look and they were

01:20:17.300 --> 01:20:25.540
 great neighbors. So that was, that I think was the real, pretty much the comment. So

01:20:25.540 --> 01:20:30.140
 is there, if there's no more discussion, can I, can I ask for a motion on this particular

01:20:30.140 --> 01:20:45.160
 issue? Ah, yes. Janelle. I motion that we postpone where they get their approval from

01:20:45.160 --> 01:20:57.780
 the other, I'm sorry. State historical, state historical people. Yes. Is that appropriate

01:20:57.780 --> 01:21:07.740
 Ron, Cynthia? Is that something we can ask to do? Madam Vice Chair. May I ask Mr. Mangita

01:21:07.740 --> 01:21:15.020
 a question? How long a period does that take to get approval? I don't know how long that

01:21:15.020 --> 01:21:21.660
 would take. Something that we need to find out. If we need to postpone to a date, there's

01:21:21.660 --> 01:21:27.140
 no notification requirements. So we can certainly say to a date, answer and bring it back as

01:21:27.140 --> 01:21:32.820
 soon as we can. But isn't there a time limit that this has to be done by? Correct. If it's

01:21:32.820 --> 01:21:38.700
 not, it has to be acted on within 75 days or it fails or it's approved or automatically

01:21:38.700 --> 01:21:46.860
 approved. Well then how about let's motion that they return with some alternatives for

01:21:46.860 --> 01:21:52.900
 the handrail solution. Can we, can we just have like a up or down vote? I know that sounds

01:21:52.900 --> 01:21:58.020
 funny, but Angie, can we, we're in the midst of- Right. I think I want to- We're not ready

01:21:58.020 --> 01:22:02.060
 for a motion. Let's- Yeah, but I was thinking if we did, it would be to deny because I would

01:22:02.060 --> 01:22:08.460
 not go without it's presented. What is being presented to us is the rail and I, that black

01:22:08.460 --> 01:22:15.340
 rail and- And the window door. And the window door. And I'm not in favor of that railing

01:22:15.340 --> 01:22:22.700
 as presented to us. So- Cynthia, I think we're messing up Robert's rules, I believe. Please

01:22:22.700 --> 01:22:28.460
 correct me. I just have a question. Commissioner Coddham, have, would you like to withdraw

01:22:28.460 --> 01:22:35.180
 your motion? Yes, I will withdraw my motion. Okay. Thank you. That would clear it up. Thank

01:22:35.180 --> 01:22:44.380
 you. Thank you. All right. So now where are we? We were still discussing. Is there any

01:22:44.380 --> 01:22:51.140
 additional or different motion that would like to be put forward? Are we able to- Sure,

01:22:51.140 --> 01:23:06.660
 I move to deny as submitted. Do I have a second? I'll second. Angie, discussion now. Lenny.

01:23:06.660 --> 01:23:14.140
 I think it would be appropriate to tell the petitioner exactly what we are denying it

01:23:14.140 --> 01:23:22.900
 for. I mean, if we wanted a different color, tell him so that when he goes to the state,

01:23:22.900 --> 01:23:30.140
 he's already changed to show what we want. I suspect he's listening in, just muted now.

01:23:30.140 --> 01:23:35.980
 So I think he's pretty much heard a lot of our discussion, thank goodness. I mean, I

01:23:35.980 --> 01:23:40.500
 think in short summary is the railing doesn't fit the house. The color does not fit the

01:23:40.500 --> 01:23:47.700
 house. Alternatives and anybody who is a historical preservation designer has not actually been

01:23:47.700 --> 01:23:50.380
 approved. It's been a contractor who just wants a quick job and is out of here. And

01:23:50.380 --> 01:23:56.100
 I understand that. And I think it's a beautiful house. It's one of the centerpieces of that

01:23:56.100 --> 01:24:01.100
 area. And it deserves to keep that historic thing. And we do appreciate the neighbors

01:24:01.100 --> 01:24:06.100
 so much, our current owners, for looking after this house. And we want it to look beautiful

01:24:06.100 --> 01:24:09.540
 and we want them to have their wonderful balcony. We just need a little bit more, I think is

01:24:09.540 --> 01:24:17.180
 what I'm hearing from people. But that's just discussion. The motion at hand is to deny

01:24:17.180 --> 01:24:28.500
 the current request for a railing and balcony access at 607 Pearl COA 20-0012. Can we have

01:24:28.500 --> 01:24:35.820
 a vote? All those in favor of denying this application, please raise your hand. All those

01:24:35.820 --> 01:24:42.500
 opposed, please raise your hand. The vote has been unanimous. I thank you very much

01:24:42.500 --> 01:24:47.740
 to our petitioner. Please take our words to heart. We want you to have what you want just

01:24:47.740 --> 01:24:54.620
 in a more historical manner. So I think we'll move on to the final, I think the final thing

01:24:54.620 --> 01:25:02.380
 for today, Ron, is here. COA 20-0013. To hold a public hearing and consideration, consider

01:25:02.380 --> 01:25:08.460
 an application for COA in accordance with section 2.9.2 of the Denton development code

01:25:08.460 --> 01:25:14.220
 to replace an exterior door and aluminum storefront with a new sliding automatic door with the

01:25:14.220 --> 01:25:19.780
 same aluminum storefront material at City Hall located at 215 East McKinney Street within

01:25:19.780 --> 01:25:26.020
 Quaker Town Park, a designated Texas historical marker site. So I think, Ron, probably you

01:25:26.020 --> 01:25:36.660
 have a show for us. Yes, let me pull all this PowerPoint. One second. And if everybody remembers

01:25:36.660 --> 01:25:46.700
 to mute themselves again. So as introduced in the introduction, this is for an exterior

01:25:46.700 --> 01:25:57.020
 door replacement here at City Hall located at 215 East McKinney Street. The subject item

01:25:57.020 --> 01:26:04.500
 is brought forward to the Historic Landmark Commission because it is a part of our Quaker

01:26:04.500 --> 01:26:12.620
 Town Park, also a designated historic landmark, Texas historic landmark site. And we wanted

01:26:12.620 --> 01:26:19.460
 to get the application, the COA application, considered by the Historic Landmark Commission.

01:26:19.460 --> 01:26:24.660
 The door itself is located close to where the city secretary, city manager's office

01:26:24.660 --> 01:26:31.340
 is located. It's one of four entries or five entries into the city. It is the area right

01:26:31.340 --> 01:26:38.020
 here, and I have some photos of that location in the next slide. Is that the door just right

01:26:38.020 --> 01:26:42.980
 over here? Yes, ma'am. This is the door itself. If you're familiar with the courtyard, it's

01:26:42.980 --> 01:26:48.820
 the one if you're facing the building to the right. That's the proposed location for the

01:26:48.820 --> 01:26:57.180
 automatic doors. The proposal is to replace it and to be automatic, but still have the

01:26:57.180 --> 01:27:01.540
 same material, the aluminum material that you see as shown there on the photo of the

01:27:01.540 --> 01:27:09.260
 existing door that's currently in place. This is a photo of what the interior looks like

01:27:09.260 --> 01:27:15.300
 at this time, the existing location. This request came from our city manager's office.

01:27:15.300 --> 01:27:20.140
 I believe there were some discussion with city council, but ultimately the city manager's

01:27:20.140 --> 01:27:26.980
 office requested that there be an automatic door for several reasons. One, it will serve

01:27:26.980 --> 01:27:35.380
 as a single point of entry. It does provide more accessible for the ADA to be able to

01:27:35.380 --> 01:27:42.820
 open as people approach. And then last, because of COVID-19, the ability to have a touch-free

01:27:42.820 --> 01:27:50.700
 entrance at City Hall was another reason for this proposed application or this proposed

01:27:50.700 --> 01:27:58.580
 application. These are some schematics, specifications for what it would look like. The one to the

01:27:58.580 --> 01:28:05.580
 left is the interior vantage point, very similar to what it would look on the exterior, but

01:28:05.580 --> 01:28:12.020
 obviously you can see that the sliding doors are going to be different from what is there

01:28:12.020 --> 01:28:17.980
 now. And I don't know if you need specific information on dimensions, but you can see

01:28:17.980 --> 01:28:24.620
 it's your typical automatic sliding door as you've entered in any other locations that

01:28:24.620 --> 01:28:30.940
 may have this type of door. With this application, with the review of what was submitted, staff

01:28:30.940 --> 01:28:37.580
 is recommending approval of the COA to replace the exterior door and aluminum storefront

01:28:37.580 --> 01:28:43.460
 to be of a sliding automatic door here at City Hall. With that, staff will stand for

01:28:43.460 --> 01:28:50.700
 any questions. Thank you, Ron. Oops, sorry. Angie? Well, I don't have a question, but

01:28:50.700 --> 01:28:56.700
 I'm going to say good job with like-for-like kind. It's what we like to see, and I don't

01:28:56.700 --> 01:29:02.540
 think we need to split hairs over which way a door opens for that, so good job. Actually,

01:29:02.540 --> 01:29:05.220
 those are just breakout doors. What I would like to see, could you show me the picture?

01:29:05.220 --> 01:29:09.420
 I was just trying to look at whether the little line that's there will still stay there on

01:29:09.420 --> 01:29:14.740
 the sliding doors, or is it just one solid piece of glass? Because these doors have a

01:29:14.740 --> 01:29:20.100
 nice little line at about three feet high or something. The applicant, hopefully, one

01:29:20.100 --> 01:29:25.820
 of our staff members, hopefully is on the line and maybe be able to answer that question.

01:29:25.820 --> 01:29:29.140
 Because I'm just staring at the doors now, so it's very easy to see that there's a nice

01:29:29.140 --> 01:29:33.340
 uniform line, and it's the continuity. See right here, I don't know if you can't see

01:29:33.340 --> 01:29:38.180
 my mouse, but there's a nice line kind of across, and whether the new ones will help

01:29:38.180 --> 01:29:45.340
 maintain that continuity, that would be something that would be nice to see on there. I know

01:29:45.340 --> 01:29:48.740
 the door itself doesn't, but it's close. There's a horizontal line.

01:29:48.740 --> 01:29:52.140
 Right, I see what you're referring to. Aren't these lanes right here that run across?

01:29:52.140 --> 01:29:56.220
 Right, and I mean, I don't think it would be too hard to add that onto that door, frankly.

01:29:56.220 --> 01:30:02.100
 I don't know. Billy, do you know if Robert is on the line to answer that question, or

01:30:02.100 --> 01:30:09.860
 is it something that we can consider? It doesn't look like you're on the line.

01:30:09.860 --> 01:30:15.500
 I hear somebody. Robert, is that you?

01:30:15.500 --> 01:30:18.460
 I guess not. Okay.

01:30:18.460 --> 01:30:27.260
 Can we look at the next slide with the drawings of the...

01:30:27.260 --> 01:30:28.900
 I don't see it. That's what I...

01:30:28.900 --> 01:30:35.540
 It doesn't appear to be there, and I don't know if it's capable of doing that, but again,

01:30:35.540 --> 01:30:39.020
 I'm not able to answer that question.

01:30:39.020 --> 01:30:45.940
 I would be excited if it maintained that horizontal line. I would have no problem. I don't really

01:30:45.940 --> 01:30:50.340
 care how it maintains it, whether it's the... They say there's an optional muntin bars,

01:30:50.340 --> 01:30:56.180
 which would probably do the same thing. That would be really nice just to maintain the

01:30:56.180 --> 01:31:01.020
 overall look, and look is something important. We're changing an O'Neill Ford building here,

01:31:01.020 --> 01:31:09.020
 folks. This is one of the Premier Texas architects, and so that would be my only thing. If I had

01:31:09.020 --> 01:31:14.540
 my druthers, I would have that on there just as a requirement to try to maintain that horizontal

01:31:14.540 --> 01:31:21.020
 line. Sliding doors are great. I couldn't get in today. I was pounding on the door,

01:31:21.020 --> 01:31:22.020
 that door.

01:31:22.020 --> 01:31:24.620
 Who's got a question, comment? Angie?

01:31:24.620 --> 01:31:29.820
 Well, I don't think there's a horizontal line on the door, the glass itself. I think there's

01:31:29.820 --> 01:31:36.500
 a bar right above it as you get in, but I did not believe... It said, "Look right above

01:31:36.500 --> 01:31:42.100
 that. Go to the door right there." That's the door handle, I think, getting in and out.

01:31:42.100 --> 01:31:47.540
 They're going to replace one of those whole panels with a sliding door, and therefore,

01:31:47.540 --> 01:31:54.180
 that one will go away. That's what I thought, if they could just put in just a look. Janiel?

01:31:54.180 --> 01:32:03.060
 I was going to say that the optional muntin, they can tilt the manufacturer where they

01:32:03.060 --> 01:32:08.220
 would like that located, so they could keep in line with that. Right now, it's actually

01:32:08.220 --> 01:32:14.580
 two panes of glass. It's a lower pane and an upper pane, so that's a mullion in there

01:32:14.580 --> 01:32:22.020
 between that, but they'll be replacing that whole configuration right there. They probably

01:32:22.020 --> 01:32:26.540
 could request that, Ron. They could request the location. I had a question on the drawings

01:32:26.540 --> 01:32:33.460
 where it had optional... It says, "Optional transom." Where is that? Oh, yeah. Up at the

01:32:33.460 --> 01:32:38.220
 top, and let's go back to the other picture. It is a transom all the way at the top, sort

01:32:38.220 --> 01:32:43.780
 of. Well, right now, it's covered. Right. You see it from the outside. I don't think

01:32:43.780 --> 01:32:49.500
 it has always been covered, Ron. Are they planning to remove the sheetrock? See, on

01:32:49.500 --> 01:32:54.820
 the outside, it's just frosted. They'll probably maintain that one on the outside, and it's

01:32:54.820 --> 01:33:00.940
 frosted, but I was curious that on the interior, if at some point, they had put sheetrock across

01:33:00.940 --> 01:33:06.740
 there for electrical access to the exit light, or whatever, if they may be... Yeah, I see

01:33:06.740 --> 01:33:11.700
 what you're talking about, this area here. It's shown on the exterior, but on the interior...

01:33:11.700 --> 01:33:15.660
 On the interior, you have the sheetrock. Oh, the exit line, yeah. With the exit line. I

01:33:15.660 --> 01:33:19.420
 don't know if that was something that was put in place at some time during the renovation.

01:33:19.420 --> 01:33:23.680
 If they're planning to go back and open the whole thing up, it'd be interesting. It'd

01:33:23.680 --> 01:33:27.740
 be interesting to look at the original plans and see what was actually there originally,

01:33:27.740 --> 01:33:34.420
 but... Yes, I... Since they've got it on their drawing, and that's why it's curious.

01:33:34.420 --> 01:33:39.220
 Yeah, no, that's a good point. I think both points, the horizontal line, and also opening

01:33:39.220 --> 01:33:45.420
 up that window, that transom, are good questions. I just wish that someone from staff can help

01:33:45.420 --> 01:33:50.140
 answer that question. I don't have the answer to that question, and I apologize. Sorry,

01:33:50.140 --> 01:33:59.300
 let me get you guys back up. Hello. Who's there? Robert? Yes, this is Robert. Hey, Robert,

01:33:59.300 --> 01:34:03.220
 did you hear those three? I'm sorry. I've been walking the meeting. I did not dial in

01:34:03.220 --> 01:34:09.940
 until just now. My apologies. So, Robert, there are two questions related to the design

01:34:09.940 --> 01:34:19.180
 of the door replacement, one being these horizontal lines. Do you see those lines that run through

01:34:19.180 --> 01:34:30.460
 the entire windows on both sides? Yeah, those lines are not going to be in the new door.

01:34:30.460 --> 01:34:40.420
 That's going to be a solid window on both sides. Those chair rails can be added after

01:34:40.420 --> 01:34:49.540
 the fact, though. And we would have those colored of the same like material. Okay, so

01:34:49.540 --> 01:34:55.540
 we can add that later after the installation. That's correct. And the second question...

01:34:55.540 --> 01:35:00.060
 It's a chair rail where people would lean against the door, but it's probably not going

01:35:00.060 --> 01:35:09.980
 to be in the first installation. But we can add that in a later time. Yes, sir. Yes. Okay.

01:35:09.980 --> 01:35:16.100
 So the second question was the transom window above. It's currently not shown from the interior,

01:35:16.100 --> 01:35:23.500
 but on the exterior, it's there. It's just covered up. What are the plans? Are we going

01:35:23.500 --> 01:35:30.380
 to impact this area or adjust this area, or is it just primarily from the door down? Or

01:35:30.380 --> 01:35:36.700
 from the... Well, that will have to all be pulled out from the top, and the top window

01:35:36.700 --> 01:35:47.660
 will also be replaced. But the blind will be put back as it is right now. Okay. So that'll

01:35:47.660 --> 01:35:54.100
 be glass still and kind of the same look? Yes, it will. Will it still have the same

01:35:54.100 --> 01:35:58.900
 divisions? It will still have the same look above it with the blind being replaced. And

01:35:58.900 --> 01:36:05.940
 it'll still have the vertical divisions on the... Yes. On the transom portion? Yes. Okay.

01:36:05.940 --> 01:36:15.380
 Because that wasn't clear from the picture. Is that a part of O'Neill Ford's actual architecture

01:36:15.380 --> 01:36:23.420
 or... I know that that area has been renovated before. I don't recall what this area looked

01:36:23.420 --> 01:36:31.020
 like before this aluminum doorway was installed, but I would guess that the window that you

01:36:31.020 --> 01:36:38.500
 see now, I believe it probably went all the way to the top. Yeah. Looking outside now,

01:36:38.500 --> 01:36:43.360
 I can see part of it further down, and it did go all the way to the top. And the horizontal

01:36:43.360 --> 01:36:48.340
 blinds continue throughout the entire front. So I think that... I'm most concerned about

01:36:48.340 --> 01:36:53.860
 maintaining those. The transom is cute, but I don't see it repeated elsewhere, but I don't

01:36:53.860 --> 01:37:01.820
 see all the courtyard from here. Sorry, Madam Chair, if I can ask, Robert, is this blind

01:37:01.820 --> 01:37:10.660
 just because of the sun? Is that primarily the reason for this to be located there? I

01:37:10.660 --> 01:37:16.780
 believe so, yes. Yeah, but it's actually a blind. Are you talking about the shade that's

01:37:16.780 --> 01:37:21.580
 above the window in the transom? Yeah. We couldn't tell it was a shade. I thought it

01:37:21.580 --> 01:37:26.220
 was sheetrock, but if it's just a blind, that makes sense. Yeah, this area right here, that's

01:37:26.220 --> 01:37:39.620
 just the blind. Yeah, it's off of the... It's hard to tell on the tiny screen. Okay, yes.

01:37:39.620 --> 01:37:44.340
 That's just holding the top of the door frame there. That's for vertical support of the

01:37:44.340 --> 01:37:53.740
 door frame. That's so that when the door slams open and shut, that the window won't flex

01:37:53.740 --> 01:38:02.060
 there. And so that part will still be there when the sliding door also goes in. This right

01:38:02.060 --> 01:38:12.220
 here, the panel above that, that is because of the sunlight? Yes, yes. Yes, that's what

01:38:12.220 --> 01:38:28.380
 that's for, yes, the sunlight. Yeah. Other discussion? Questions? So I just want to ask

01:38:28.380 --> 01:38:38.380
 one more time that you said that the horizontal lines could be included in this? Are you talking

01:38:38.380 --> 01:38:43.780
 about the ones that run level with the door closure? I'm sorry, the door locker? No, the

01:38:43.780 --> 01:38:49.180
 ones that run level with what all the other windows look like. Okay, yeah, the chair

01:38:49.180 --> 01:38:56.820
 rail. It would be added to the door. It would make it look so much more like it fit in even

01:38:56.820 --> 01:39:09.620
 though it's modern. Yes, it can. Yes, it can. Yes, it will? Yes. Yes. Other questions, comments?

01:39:09.620 --> 01:39:16.820
 Angie, Melanie, Katie, Evan, Lenny? I think accessibility is paramount with city facilities

01:39:16.820 --> 01:39:22.820
 like this, and it doesn't look that far off from what's already there. Yes, certainly

01:39:22.820 --> 01:39:27.020
 just as long as we do the horizontal line, it can be a piece of tape where I like here.

01:39:27.020 --> 01:39:31.980
 Yeah, just put a piece of paint or something to maintain the line. We need to have accessibility.

01:39:31.980 --> 01:39:40.060
 All right, anybody want to make a motion since I don't hear anybody commenting? I will make

01:39:40.060 --> 01:39:55.020
 a motion that we approve this request. Second. This is COA 20-00133. Is it possible now?

01:39:55.020 --> 01:40:02.140
 I don't remember Roberts to add a friendly amendment to that. You're referring to the

01:40:02.140 --> 01:40:09.340
 lines. Yes. Yeah, the horizontal lines. Cynthia, there's a second. Can they make, I believe

01:40:09.340 --> 01:40:14.100
 you can do a friendly amendment? Yes. I would just like to add a friendly amendment that

01:40:14.100 --> 01:40:18.260
 they maintain some form of horizontal line that's the chair rail that matches the rest

01:40:18.260 --> 01:40:25.340
 and in some form or another. Nothing fancy, just something that visually looks like it

01:40:25.340 --> 01:40:35.820
 belongs. And I have no objection. Okay. Discussion, comments? Are we ready to vote? I'm ready

01:40:35.820 --> 01:40:41.620
 to vote. Everybody else? I'm sorry, Evan, did you have a friendly amendment? No, I'm

01:40:41.620 --> 01:40:46.660
 ready to vote. You have no issues with that, the horizontal lines? Not at all. No, I think

01:40:46.660 --> 01:40:51.860
 it'd be great. All right, so Lenny, did you have a question? Are you ready to vote? Ready

01:40:51.860 --> 01:40:57.180
 to vote. She's ready. All right, let's vote on adding our accessible doors, maintaining

01:40:57.180 --> 01:41:00.740
 the same look as before with the friendly amendment to make the lines somehow shape

01:41:00.740 --> 01:41:06.260
 or form neat and look similar. All those in favor, please raise your hands so we can get

01:41:06.260 --> 01:41:13.140
 a count for Cynthia. And all those opposed? And again, we are unanimous. The ayes in favor

01:41:13.140 --> 01:41:19.620
 of having accessible doors have it. I believe, thank you very much for answering. I forgot

01:41:19.620 --> 01:41:26.940
 it was Billy who answered our questions or Robert. So I think that's kind of where we

01:41:26.940 --> 01:41:34.380
 are. Do we have any other business to attend to? New business, old business, anything else?

01:41:34.380 --> 01:41:45.300
 No? The concluding items, do we have to worry about that? To add into this at all? Yeah,

01:41:45.300 --> 01:41:51.740
 that's for any items that want to be added. No, no. All right, do we need a motion to

01:41:51.740 --> 01:41:56.380
 adjourn? I move to adjourn. Yes. Can somebody move? Was that you, Evan? Yes, that was me.

01:41:56.380 --> 01:42:03.900
 I move to adjourn. Second. Second. All right. So all those in favor? Can I count two hands?

01:42:03.900 --> 01:42:08.140
 Thank you all so much for coming. I certainly appreciate coming to the Zoom meeting. It

01:42:08.140 --> 01:42:12.860
 was great. Thanks for all the hard work and effort. Have a great week. It's only Monday.

01:42:12.860 --> 01:42:15.900
 It's got to be better, right? Thank you, guys. Thank you.