Historic Preservation Commission – March 6, 2024

good afternoon everybody Welcome to the March historic preservation Commission meeting and thanks for coming in today my name is Taylor fudge I will tell you this is my final time chairing the historic preservation commission and as usual we have a very full agenda today and we want to get everyone out of here on time so we'll go ahead and get and and we'll go ahead and get started please limit individual conversations during this meeting this will ensure that commission members and applicants can hear each other please remain quiet until you're called upon and when you do address the commission please come up to the podium here state your name and address for our records before the commission votes on any item we will ask if anyone from the public wishes to speak I'm terrible at this so my commission fellow commissioner members will help make sure that that occurs speakers will be given 3 minutes to relay information to commission members please be thorough but also be very mindful of your time the the agenda and documents for today's meeting were located on the prime GV website if you're following Along online you can select agenda on the right hand side of the historic preservation commission meeting to see which items are being discussed written comments received more than 24 hours before today's meeting were posted online and were shared with commission members at this point if you brought new materials with you they cannot be shared with the commission so if you brought those with you please leave them at your seat we can't accept and review new information although we will have we can and will have conversation with you about it uh repeat we cannot accept new information Keith would you please call roll fudge present gains present Milner present for present R present Whitney present cor excellent thank you see procedures for today's meeting are noted in the agenda thanks Siri U for anyone who's unfamiliar with the process please refer to the procedur section there are two items we do like to specifically note regarding this meeting process and those revolve around certificate of appropriateness and appeals regarding certificates of appropriateness after an application is approved and the 10day protest period has expired the HP officer will mail the ca to the applicant construction permits cannot be issued until the ca is issued please contact HP staff for final design review inspection or to withdraw items that will not be completed regarding appeals to the board of adjustments any person agreed by a decision granting or a CA May appeal to the Oklahoma City Board of adjustments all appeals shall be made within 10 days of the commission decision by filing a written notice of appeal with the clerk of the board of adjustments Katie what do we have from the office of the historic reservation officer the only thing I wanted to note for the commission and for uh the public is that we had a case that had been appealed and was to be heard at Board of adjustment tomorrow was a um denial of a demolition of a church at 25th in chartel that appeal has been withdrawn so that we not be be heard by Board of adjustment if you were planning on attending that meeting you now have uh your afternoon free um and we will keep you all updated on what comes next with that application and that property perfect let's see we'll move on to item number three the acceptance of minutes have my fellow Commissioners had a chance to review the minutes from the February 7th meeting and if so do we have any questions or perhaps a motion to accept or modify I move to accept am minuts move by commissioner Milner do we have second second second by commissioner Whitley please vote on accepting the minutes in primov okay that motion passes unanimously Katie what do we have from code enforcement I don't think we have anybody present today from code enforcement nothing particular to report as always the code enforcement report is in your packet if you have questions about a specific item you can reach out to HP staff or contact contct the city's action center for more information okay any continuance announcements or requests no uh continuances on the agenda and no new requests that have come in since the agenda was published okay how about uh public hearings about revolving around dilapidated structures or yeah dilapidated structures uh no dilapidated structures this month uh we do have a national register nomination excellent let's talk about that so this uh it's been a little while since we've had one so just refresher uh because we are a certified local government we get to provide comment and recommendation on any national register nomination in Oklahoma City uh that then goes on to city council and then is forwarded on to the state historic preservation office and National Park Service um Linda ozanne is here from the state historic preservation office and can answer questions about the nomination but just briefly this is at 429 Northwest 10th Street and 1100 North Walker Avenue this is the former Browns Bakery uh Clyde supermarket and tgn why historically it's been nominated um for its uh architectural significance as a mid-century modern um example of commercial architecture and for its historic significance under Commerce um as an example of you know the evolution of our modern um grocery shopping Auto oriented um habits in the uh that time period in Midtown um and the nomination has been done on behalf of the property owner they are intending to pursue historic tax credits for the rehabilitation of the structure and we haven't received any um objection to the nomination and staff recommended a recommendation um in the affirmative to um need to pull up what the actual wording of that document says that what your recommendation is but um and again Linda is here if you guys have any questions okay hello perfect anything else that we should know about in particular in regarding this particular project okay I mean it seems pretty straightforward it I mean it it's been there it just feels like this is the right um building for this kind of nomination too and I just missed their donuts so I got that going from me um do we just need to yes so you've got a recommendation to recommend the nomination to the mayor and city council the Oklahom historic preserv Review Committee and the state historic preservation officer and The Keeper of the national register and to adopt the resolution that is provided in your staff report oh perfect do we have any citizens that wish to speak on this particular project or either for or against okay um let's see so the motion would be let's see well I guess first we have a motion on this particular item but okay I was going to say say that it would be the motion to nominate Clyde's supermarket and tgny you probably ought to just read this entire thing on here right R oh yeah yeah we can read the resolution I mean you're just making a recommendation to forward the nomination on but yes can I just make that motion to recommend um forwarding the nomination for Clyde supermarket and TG and Y as eligible for the L steam do we have a second move by commissioner po I was that commissioner gains or was that second by commissioner gains your please working on it I can just you want to do a verbal yes uh uh uh I okay that passes unanimously as well that is already tentatively queued up for March 26 city council so we'll get it moving perfect okay no items on the consent docket which was unusual today so it takes us right into item D cases for individual consideration the first one we have on Deck is hpca 23 00132 at 2801 North Hudson this is Jefferson Park word two consideration of possible action on application by fish cop LLC for a certificate of appropriateness to revise hpca 23- 0 132 to8 split lot elective 9 modify window trim elective 10 add and reconfigure Windows elective 11 modify Port trailing elective and 12 install galvanized to round gutters elective this is a project that the commission has seen several times you first saw it for an application to rezone the property so that they could build a second duplex behind the historic structure that's there at the corner um that was approved um and included Provisions to allow for a lot split but we didn't actually approve a lot split so they are here requesting that now um the commission has also approved the ca for the construction of the the new duplex and the applicant has made several revisions to the design of that um number 10 add and reconfigure Windows uh staff recommended approval of that those were all very much in keeping with what had previously been approved the applicant wants to modify window trim from a 4 in trim down to a 1 and a half inch staff was concerned that that was perhaps not in keeping with the style of both the new duplex as proposed and the kind of architectural style of the historic duplex that they are um mimicking is not the right word but that they are kind of coordinating with um we're trying to have some compatibility with um the applicant has proposed changing from a wood Port trailing to a more kind of industrial metal railing staff also was concerned that wasn't in the character of the previous approval and the adjacent structure and then installing galvanized half round gutters um again just kind of another we're going with materials that are not typical of that style and of the adjacent property so recommended continuance on um a couple of those items and then approval on the lot split and uh number 10 adding and reconfiguring windows okay thank you can you please say your name and address for the record yeah Claus Ryman Philip 281 North Hudson and um yeah I think uh Katie uh summed it up pretty well we have um we're here for the lot split and the lot split is uh pretty much the same as we had for the Spud and for the um improved design we just have to come separately for the actual lot split so uh that's one item um happy to answer any questions on that if you have them same with the windows uh we really just added a couple windows Windows um but pretty much all the windows are the same Arrangement as they were in the original application um and then regarding the window trim yeah we um you know looking at it we felt that um you know we we still it will still be wood trim basically it's the same construction as what you would normally see we just liked a slightly uh Slimmer profile basically and it you know like the the existing duplex on site has vinyl sighing vinyl trim you know which hopefully at some point um will also be replaced but you know my kind of interpretation maybe this is also uh related to the port trailing um you know we we took pains or we took um we made an effort to you know make this new duplex kind of fit in with the the scale and the um massing and you know you know general form of houses you might see on that street um even with exposed rafter taals things like that you know so I think really you know if you drive by it I don't think you would really think twice about um you know I don't think it would stand out in that sense and like the window trim or the port railing they might be a little bit different from the houses around but I think unless you're really paying attention you wouldn't really notice it and I think it's really in line with you know this idea of the historic guidelines where new construction especially you wanted to be contextual and kind of fit into the neighborhood at the same time it shouldn't necessarily um try to mimic I guess theoric structures and so my opinion although I'm uh you know happy to discuss um I feel like it's not that big a break from what would traditionally be you know designed on a house like that that it would stand out or not being line with you know addressing the character of the neighborhood I guess you could say um yeah so same with the port trailing uh I think from a distance it would seem like it almost like looked like a porch like a wood porch trailing the rails are basically the same width as wood rail would be it would be painted so it's not hopefully you know we're not going for like a super industrial look necessarily but I think it would be like maybe a slightly more updated look and really it's a durability thing too you know we don't have to you know it's it's kind of exposed on the uh South Side so we don't have to repaint it all the time replace it when the wood rots that kind of thing so okay I mean I certainly can understand the durability portion of that and I I do see your point too on you know from the street it'll probably approximate kind of what was already uh suggested but it is a little bit of a departure how so gutters railing and trim kind of like kind of minor design details how dead set are you guys on keeping those things because naturally I think we would be inclined to push it more towards something that's supported in the guidelines but talk to us about where you guys are at I think we would be open on you know I think we'd like the metal railing from a maintenance standpoint you know and and like you know right now I think we have it at like an inch and a half wide which is basically what the wood would be too so in my opinion it wouldn't be a big departure from um you know I don't think You' look twice at it and even be like oh is that metal or is it wood you know um the window trim uh I think that's something that we're more keen on keeping if we can um you know would be painted the same as the siding same material so I don't again I don't think it's um a drastic change at all you know I I don't you know we would notice it and I think we would be happy the way we're showing it you know I don't know um that your average person driving by would be like oh that's one and a half inch trim and not three and a half inch trim or something you know but but I understand you know wanting to there's a balance between approximating what's typical and you know what's different I guess my argument on this is just it's a it's a new building it's not even replacing an old building and overall I think it would fit in and you wouldn't even think twice about it as a as a new structure you know I think it kind of fits in the neighborhood but there are like these small little hints um that are like oh maybe that is a newer building or maybe that isn't you know maybe that wasn't built in the 1920s it was built you know 200000 so um yeah and then comment on the on staff's concerns with with a galvanized guttering and because that that is a bit of a departure as well typically we see painted and more stand you know guttering that's that's something honestly we can um I think it would be more critical for us we have it on the back of the house not the front of the house I think the back of the house would be more critical in the front so maybe if if it was allowed in the back where it's not visible from the street anyway and in the front maybe we even just leave it off for now and on you know we'd probably be happy coming back as just like a normal HP application you know like people modify their houses you know down the road for like oh man we really wish we had a gutter here maybe for the front of the house we just come back you know so I I think the gutter especially in the front is not a hill that we would die on we'd kind of like it in the back um but you know I don't know if it makes a big difference if it's visible or not and gutters are allowed um the guidelines just say that they should be a you know painted finish not a not the galvanized yeah um so so you could have them on the front or the I don't know if you're wanting galvanized on the back um and then come back and do a yeah if like galvanized would be allowed in the back then we can just take a look at what what's out there that's not galvanized and if we find something that we like that might even be administratively approvable but we can administratively approve a standard yeah painted finished gutter anywhere on the structure okay um the galvanized is what requires commission review okay you a problem with the profile the half round you know um I mean that's not what we most commonly see but we do know that people had half round gutters I think the profile is less um eye-catching and less noticeable than a different material because usually gutters are a painted finish that blends in with the trim or with the you know color of the structure and you don't they kind of just disappear um yeah yeah I'm happy to I would say just leave the front one off for now we don't have to argue of it it's not it's not something I would downhill on anyway and if we find a product we like and it's painted or whatever we'll we'll get with staff and maybe just get it administratively approved or something so yeah I don't know that I have any other questions I don't I also don't know that I'm necessarily opposed to any of the items being suggested after hearing some of the explanation I I agree and I think the unless the Spud mentioned something specifically the criteria that this needs to meet is for new construction which should be differentiated um I don't think the trim needs to match a historic structure I think coli kind of borrowed trouble by blending in so well um but yeah I I don't have an issue with those details kind of differentiating it subtly any citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project do anybody would anybody like to make a motion on this particular project so just to be clear uh we're leaving the front gutter off um the back one can remain galvanized half round not visible or um was there some other consideration on that I I think it'd be a recommend approval with um with staff for the gutter um but I thought you said maybe we you'd look at a if there's a like a pre-finished yeah I was going to see if like if if for the just for the back patio if we left that galvanized and then just leave the front front one off or if that would if that applied to all of it you know like if it wasn't visible is it a different consideration or not I don't know what staff's position would be on this but it's on the back of the house I wouldn't be opposed to galvanized guttering on the back of the house on a new new build new construction okay so does the proposal have it on the front yeah so what I submitted has it on the back and the front I would say we just leave it off the front and I'll you know I'll see if there's a different product that we want to add and if we do we can just come back for that specific item okay uh let's see if I can make a motion here we've got items 8 nine 10 11 and 12 is that right okay uh I move to uh approve hpca 23132 items 8 9 10 11 and 12 with the condition that the galvanized half round gutters be removed from the front elevation uh and with staff's findings I'll second move by commissioner Remy second by commissioner Milner please vote in Prime go okay all right appreciate it and I'll miss seeing you up there Taylor but I'm sure I'll see you around I hope we do thanks Claus appreciate it okay item number two hpca 2300147 at 108 Northwest 9th Street this is inherited chills East toward six consideration and possible action on application by DEA Canary Omega Investments for scarlet Lake C Omega Investments for certificate of appropriateness to one replace windows damaged Beyond repair required and nine replace front non-historic Windows elective um this is again work that has been initiated but must be reviewed as if it had not um already occurred uh the commission has seen this project a couple of times now and a number of items have been approved we are down to these last who addressing the windows um unfortunately we still have documentation that shows a product that does not meet the guidelines it is a simulated divided light window and the guidelines require uh true div ided light and it also in at least some instances mton patterns do not match the mutton patterns of the historic windows that were previously in place so um they are out of continuances on this one and we've recommended uh denial but they could come back and apply with new window documentation that meets the applicable guidelines um at any time okay can you please state your name and address for the record uh my name is Scarlet Li the address is 20 note West 13 okay talk to us about the windows that are installed and uh so right now the staff has recommended a denial with prejudice the windows don't appear to meet the guidelines so talk to us about what what you got there and kind of where we're at and kind of the state of this particular project I don't understand what you said I we don't understand what you said okay so staff recommended a denial with prejudice on this particular case right now it appears that the windows don't meet the guidelines oh how come the window don't meet the guideline it look exactly the same on both sides my wood my understanding is they're based off staff staff's report it's not a true divided light window and the M pattern doesn't approximate the previous Mountain pattern that was there I think there's maybe five vertical windows original and 5 one the other side is the same those are origal n okay yeah my understanding is a four over one previously do we have any documentation to show that so yeah we've got historic photos that you all have provided of the previous windows that right there had various so those are four over one and then we've got new windows that have gone in that are five over one so the divided like portion in the top is not the same number of panes um and then the window product that has been been used is a simulated divided light meaning it's one solid piece of glass with muttons on the outside mutts on the inside the guidelines say that it has to be a true divided light product with individual panes of glass supported by muttons that go all the way through front to back original W were four the new what what are we doing here I mean is the the windows are we God there is completely unre usable and flexiglass and everything what we doing improving the house why we just like arguing for like one foot over I mean we kept the new windows installed here you see the photo it's kept all the historic character so I don't understand well and the window windows don't meet the guidelines as stated in the guidelines I think we've explained both the divided light issue and the M issue I mean it certainly looks better than what was there before but it doesn't meet the guidelines as stated in well in the rules that we have here and so I think right now we're moving towards a denial with prejudice unless there's new information that can be presented need to bring back the old windows back and put guess would for a window that that is in strict compliance with the guidelines I mean the the look at that it just looked the same I mean that not even there before it was metal windows and what are we doing here wasn't there chairman wasn't there a conversation last time on the same thing and you said that there wasn't windows that you could bring because the windows were gone no the windows is not there if they install like those are metal windows those a metal is not even original I'm trying to get clarification you said do you want me to bring the windows in so we can see them but at the last meeting you said there were no windows so are there windows or not not Windows the old ones I don't understand what you say I'm sorry like you want me to bring the old windows in so you can see in person how it look like no you just mentioned that that's what you just mentioned so I'm just you want me to bring those old window back if any of you here can fix the windows please come and fix the windows there's no way we can fix the windows with the condition it is and look at the way it is right now as a compared to what it was what is the difference do you see oh the the windows the windows that you all have installed are do not the windows and then you kept the whole project is like holding off I don't understand this do you all have new information to present today on these windows or not it's the same thing that we said and then it just the and you kept sending the same information I don't understand and we talked to me with Angela she said yes and now she said no I don't understand this are we trying to Target us that's my questions here I don't know what you mean by that but what I will tell you is right now you have Windows that do not comply with the rules and regulations in a historic preservation District so if we put four over one would that have worked if they were true divided light Windows four over one and basically were the exact same as what you had in there before yes that would work so if the wood went all the way through and then glass on each side is that would that meet the definition of a true divided light yes so where the mutton itself goes all the way through from front to back and it's one piece of mutton and the glass panes are individual panes in between the muttons that's a true true divided light window that's what the guidelines require when we replace windows and yes on the front those were non-historic windows we don't know what was there originally I think the mutton pattern there is fine it just needs to be a true divided Light Window in that location and then for the ones where there were historic Windows it needs to match the mutton pattern that was there if it was 4 over one or 3 over one it needs to match what was there that's what the guidelines require when we approve a window replacement so no double pain double pain is okay you can do a thermal Paine window with a true divided light do you have a recommended brand or anything so there's a there's a number Marvin makes them Colby break makes them um I think gelwin has a true divided light if any of the architect people want to holler that yeah P makes one too do they have a true divided light I believe so okay um there there are a number of different brands that make true divided light insulated glass wood windows that meet that meet our guidelines that would me okay so we could keep the two on the front we could keep those two windows because they're five over one and we don't know what was there originally so are they true divided light they're made like the other ones so I don't know they would so my understanding from what we've seen is that everything that's been installed to this point is a simulated divided light um window can it be five over one or does it need to be four because they don't know on the front we don't know what was there and those are very large windows so I don't personally don't think a 5 over one is um inappropriate for those front windows it's just the ones where we know what was there historically that it needs to be consistent with what was there before yeah the the side with the driveway does have two windows that are 5 over one so the historic character has a a mix so when you go to revise you'll want to match the pattern of the historic windows that were there so do we need to look at the houses that's already in the area for their windows on the front to make no there's there's photographic evidence of the historic windows need to match that does that help clarify at all does that help clarify at all I cannot hear you does that help clarify at all uh not really I mean it looks the same to it probably doesn't feel good but hopefully we've given you a little bit more guidance on what you guys need to replace these windows with and then just a clarification from staff um so the original windows are wood the ones installed are I'm assuming aluminum yes it's an aluminum CED wood window correct that's been installed yeah um that's my understanding is that it's an aluminum clad so the guidelines allow aluminum on the front of the house is on the so aluminum Cloud wood is allowed the catch is there are not any true divided light aluminum clad Wood Products you can't get the cladding with a mutton that goes through front to back so you're limited to wood for a true divided life I mean you drive by do you know the difference or you have to come in close knock on it go inside the house to see the to see what it is honestly it looks just the same from outside if that's what you really matters I and I think it's like we should continue because if like just because of those four windows and then you leave the house vacant and empty you to cause more the police to come in and is like vandalism homeless people you don't want to see homeless people vandalism around the neighborhood either okay so with all due respect none of that's relevant um There are rules you didn't follow the rules we're probably going to deny we're trying to give you some guidance for when you come back with the new application for something that will be accepted um I'm sorry that you didn't follow the rules can you tell us the whole uh because you handled the whole paperwork can you tell like the process how it went and uh what the communication was because it's terrible honestly I don't know that any of that information is necessary right now uh we do have other cases that we have to get on to no I I think we need to listen this because if not there's no way we can improve the city the whole purpose of all of this is to improve the integrity and the development of the city what we doing here is completely like punishing the people trying to improve the city here great news is there's an appeal process so we'll make our motion and you can appeal this I think all of you know that's in your heart as well you just keep denying the fact and try to improve it and make it a coming into the 21st century thank you do we have a motion or actually do we have any citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project um I actually would I hate to slow this down but I would love to hear from staff because I I am concerned about how we got to hear what the communication is was between the last meeting and this meeting um and if they reached out for the appropriate guidance and then did not follow that guidance or if or or what the situation might Di has been communicating last year last year it's been been four months of talking back and forth and then is over the four Windows I'm like Jesus Christ four months how much of progress that we have to pay in there how much of like the like the budget of the city have to spend on this when we have two homeless guy sitting in front of the city right now they homeless tents everywhere why don't we devote that do we want to describe the process to this point or do we want to hear a motion yes we want to know yes we want to learn it take may take you five minutes or 10 minutes to see the whole process but we can improve this and then none of this will happen again ever and it won't waste any of your time again in the future it sounds like commissioner McBride does want to hear the the things that led up to this particular time so if you want to go ahead and describe that that would be fine as how I I specifically actually would like to hear from staff uh on any Communications that occurred between the last meeting and this meeting um with reference to any kind of Direction they may have received and whether or not any changes had occurred during that time or anything had occurred in their um proposal that would have been relevant to that communication uh during the previous meeting um Diana Scarlet's employee came to the HP meeting and sat here at the bench and we discussed what is required via the guidelines and standards and the fact that we had been attempting to acquire the necessary documentation for the proposed windows for the past several months and that the photo documentation and the window documentation that we had received was unclear um inaccurate or did not comply and following that meeting Diana and I did discuss again the project um I reached out to her called her and said I am under the impression based on neighborhood reports that the work has already taken place to the building and that we very much need to make sure that the documentation for those windows is provided and that the documentation is both accurate and consistent with the guidelines and standards that is all and and then you received additional documentation that the documentation that has been provided included photographs that staff took at the site um Diana did provide some information for the packet you have that in your packet can you tell her the how you did like since when you start a conversations yeah go go ahead you need to talk I don't know what to say I mean you need to say I'm just frustrated sure you know because we've done everything I've done everything I went and did the research we got the windows they're wooden windows they're wood all the way through they're not plastic they're not cheap they're not and we're trying to make it make the neighborhood look better and make the value of the neighbor's homes go up so all we're trying to do is just fix it and replace them and every time we try to do something then I don't have the right paperwork or I don't have this right or I don't have that right so the guidelines are not or not you know I don't have the right guidelines for where where did you find the guideline I mean I went went and from paperwork that you guys have sent out it's not clear so I read through all of that and and did my research and talked to Angela over and over and over again she's been very helpful but when we come up here to talk to you guys then the guidelines are not right so we don't understand so when we met with them they say yeah that's should be okay and now when we come up here is completely different it flip 180° and we don't understand I want to make sure that the windows that's on the west east side meets what it's supposed to be because you can see them from the street I mean I so we're all operating off the same set of guidelines the ones that you guys are using the ones that we're using they're identical so I I'm I struggled to see how they're unclear in that regard when it says you know mun patterns must be the same it must be true divided light those window all those things facing Broadway is facing Broadway the windows do not comply with the guidelines it's facing the Broadway it's not facing H will stop the windows do not comply there is no way for in my opinion for us to approve this with an uncompliant a window that does not comply with the guidelines so I'd have to replace those four Windows with correct I think Marvel I think somebody from the public want does anybody from the public wish to speak Marva elard 1521 nor chartel you all are aware of everything I'm going to say but I think I might need to say some of it out loud um most of the work on this house has been done after a stop work order was issued the columns on the porch were added the ones closest on either side of the front door window openings were boarded up in the back of the house um but Mrs Cal proceeded to work on the house even at the last meeting when we were all here she had workers at the house working while we were here and she was saying that she was going to bring more information back or provide Angela with more information it's only fair that everybody in the neighbor neighborhood plays by the same rules and the rules are readily available and it didn't happen in this case and we ask that you deny with prejudice and get the house in the condition that it should be in thank you thank you okay do we have any other members of the public that wish to speak I want to say it out loud all this house when we we got it the roof was leaking you can see on that photos right there the roof like the leak was go down there get into the foundations what are we going to wait till the whole month two months of the whole process to get the house in the more worse conditions and why not doing that like the two columns the front why are we doing that the beams like this is curv like this and every houses around it has the columns we need to support those beams otherwise the house will collapse you want another victim of call like HP reservations again well I understand the HP here is to keep the quality historic reservations of the homes we all love historic homes we love that but the process and procedures here please look again CU it's like in the guideline it's like a lot of papers and so confusing why we are doing this to to the growth of Oklahoma City why are we doing this I very much appreciate your passion I believe I appreciate that but I would love to work and include AI into the website do we have any other citizens that wish to speak good afternoon ladies and gentlemen my name is Taylor vul 827 Northwest 17th Street um I live very close to this house um alpha alpha 17th Street um I've sat through uh three meetings with the St preservation one of the things that I found um through a lot of these uh meetings I pay attention to every one of these historic meetings each one of these dockets one of the things I'd like to say is um one of the opportunities that some residences have res uh individuals that are trying to do remodeling um to talk directly with staff and staff can give an appropriate guide guideline I know that can be done outside the meeting and it's possible that this might be a consideration stipulate what needs to be performed what needs to be what exactly it needs to look like it may be something that could be considered with just staff appropriateness and maybe the boarded up windows can be alleviated in in the neighborhood a lot sooner than waiting next month just something I wanted to say I do I do see where she's got some detail on doing a lot of research on the subject sounds like with with wood windows they're doing everything they can to get this back to Historic preservation guidelines I I do I do do believe that that they've done all the research as best as they can with the guidance and time just based on the way that they presented it it is a little bit challenging to get the exact right window because we don't have these original Windows available correct materials um the exact materials we try to get our best and follow guidelines um I do know that woodwi windows are twice to three times more expensive just in general so you know that they're trying so I just thought that so I would just like to say that it's possible that you can consider staff to work directly with them we might come to a resolve if if it appropriate appropriate okay thank you for those comments thank you do we have a motion move um hbca 23-0 0147 denial with prejudice of items number one because there specific findings of facts items 1 through nine moveed by commissioner excuse me gains do we have a second I'll second second by commissioner Milner please vote and Prime go okay that denial with prejudice is passed unanimously thank you just to be clear commissioner gangs was your motion for items one and nine for items one through nine I said item number one item number one okay I wanted to be clear so only one item okay do we have a motion for item number nine replacing front nonh historic Windows go ahead I missed it and do we need more discussion around item number nine no I just can't P up so did you mean to make that also in the motion yeah I just can't pull it up so yes so did we want to I'm sorry did you you can just quickly motion to deny item nine with prejudice okay just do a second motion yes commissioner Gaines would you like to submit a second motion yes I would like to deny item number nine with prejudice right yes and all second move by commissioner gain second by commissioner Milner please vote again in Prime GV okay that item also passes unanimous or that denial with prejudice also passes unanimously thank you all right we will move on to item number three hpca 23 3 00148 at 827 Northwest 17th Street this is in mesta park Bo 6 consideration and possible action on application by Taylor vote Clover LLC for certificate of appropriateness to one replace two-story accessory structure elective um I'm going to give we've seen this one several times it's been a couple months I'm going to kind of give a recap um previously at this site there was a Structure indicated on the 1919 sandborn maps to be an auto house uh or garage is what the sandborn maps called them staff photos that you have in your packet clearly show the a garage door on the south elevation of the structure um and the form and placement of the building is consistent with those sandborn maps and with other garage or Carriage House structures of that same time period um so for our purposes staff considers that to have been a garage it may not have functioned as a garage in the recent past but historically we believe that's what that was we have seen no evidence to prove otherwise in the summer of 2222 um we first began communication with the applicant about the application process about the guidelines um at about that same time work began at this site with no Casa and no building permits having been issued um that rear shed Edition was removed off the historic structure it appears that a new Foundation or stem wall was poured the brick stem wall is no longer present um by September the historic garage had effectively been demolished with a new two-story structure framed up um at this time we received the first application for certificate of appropriateness from the applicant that was ultimately denied um primarily because we never got complete and accurate documentation uh the applicant reapplied which is the ca that is before you all today with more thorough documentation um they have revised the design several times since that initial um reapplication the um demolition of the original structure has never really been um addressed um typically we would have asked for documentation that it was damaged Beyond repair um infeasible to rehabilitate that it was non-historic Etc as you all always do when we viw the removal of a historic garage um it is no longer present so we kind of have to move forward from there but um just need to acknowledge that this is a replacement of a historic structure that was demolished um the new structure that is proposed is not a garage um and does not appear to meet applicable guidelines for the construction of a garage or an accessory building it does not approximate the historic structure that we have um uh a significant amount of documentation of we have lots of photos we have site plans Etc um it is significantly taller than the historic structure and then other surrounding garages um the design reads more like a primary dwelling like a house than an accessory building uh increases the footprint um it appears to sit on both the rear and side property line which is likely a concern when it comes to permitting for the structure um and um the structure is not described as a garage it at various times has shown storage on the interior office space restroom Etc the future use of it is not abundantly clear um that's not typically a great concern to the commission um although when it comes to something functioning as an office or part of a business then that can become a a challenge for permitting if it's determined that that's not an appropriate use this uh application is out of continuances at this time um so staff has recommended uh denial okay can you please take your name and address for the record Taylor vul 827 Northwest 17th Street perfect I occupy this building before you um since I've been first came came to these meetings I've been occupying this building I plan to make this my for potentially forever home I want to raise my family in this house so this is a very important house to me and it's going to be a very important house to my family and uh my mom included she's here with you today from all historic records that we can find uh cannot find any evidence to suggest that it was ever used as an automobile garage uh there's there is something that um Katie had mentioned that that it may have been a SAT uh Carriage House I don't know when that may have changed u i I don't see all the historic wood was present uh doesn't it doesn't uh elevation doesn't go in line with any of the concrete that's existing or the back Alleyway so I don't know when that would have taken place um as far as I can tell from all the pictures I have all the evidence I've gathered I I found that uh all the original wood was situated elevated um where where it is today um so to to help with that um Arc with with in regards to it being any any sort of garage or accessory structure um we've talked in detail about how it has its own address and there was questions about that recordkeeping um we have with Oklahoma City uh zoning department we have uh Planning Department subdivision zoning um been in conversation with gent named David C Cunningham um that it is 1808 North Francis and it's confirmed it has its own address um as far as um as far as their record keeping U it's always had its own address all of the photos that we have from as far back as we can find show 1808 North Francis on the building those were submitted with my application today to help with that uh to show that it is its own address it's its own building it's not suggestive that it's ever been a garage I don't intend to use it as a garage um there was another garage a completely different building there were three buildings on this lot one of them was a garage that was um situated where the concrete currently exists in the northwest corner of the lot that was de demol de demolished I believe in the 90s early 2000s um previous owners um one thing that I'd like to note is um with with going back in history we've done a lot of research on this property um the previous owners uh had had been trying to get this kind of work performed with historic preservation and with the city and permits and they found themselves stuck uh I talked to the previous owner uh specifically um had a meeting with them to to see what they had found with uh in in line with the city and try to get this building remodeled and and back to Historic guidelines is what their goal was that's what our goal is today as well um what they said was they was incredibly challenging they found a roadblock that was the primary reason they sold this house and they sold it to redin uh they gave them an offer on on a TV show and and then I bought it from red fin and I wanted to get it back to Historic guidelines I want to follow all historic guidelines that are presented um I followed them as as closely and as as possible we've spent we've spent count all guidance from his uh staff every step of the way um we want to get the windows exactly in line with guidance which which we submitted if they need adjustment I'd love to hear any more a detail any more recommendations and and if if staff were to say a different type of window would be even more appropriate I'd love to hear it easy to to make that order change uh one of the things I'd like to note is the original door from 1906 door is is going to be uh is is refurbished and is ready to be installed for the front door of the building um we have done several revisions to this project we started with trying to be most appropriate with um other buildings in the area where we started and where we're at today are are based on changes that we've made because of this meeting as well as staff recommendations um one of the recommendations that was brought to our attention at the last two meetings ago um that I was president was the question of do we want exterior stairs or do we want to have the stairs on the inside out of the building um that that request Was Heard and the stairs are now on the interior of the building one of the pictures that I didn't see depicted was the interior of the structure uh we did ask we were asked to show demonstrate what the interior is going to look like and what the use of the property is going to be um so we did Supply those with our application hopefully we have those in the report um we intend to utilize it as our office space very important business that my mom and I are going to conduct we we um we spend a lot of time remodeling houses and operate a business as an Airbnb for a lot of properties in the nearby Metro but not this one but this one um with the exception of this house is not ever going to be used as a home share um there was an application for a home share uh one year ago um I didn't realize you know I didn't realize going that that type of meeting was going to have an impact with a lot of things with the neighbors and getting this this building remodeled but I want to be very abundantly clear I have absolutely zero intention to ever have a home share at this house I intend to occupy this house in my primary residence for decades future Generations I hope to pass this on to my kids I'll never sell it was my intentions I want to make this building correct and historically sound with with all recommendations that you have today any adjustments you have I I'll be happy to to come up with a remedy for that um one of the last from the last meeting to today's meeting um I should say yes from last meeting to today's meeting one of the recommendations we have from staff was to include Dormers we're trying to get get the house looking more in line with what historically was there adding Dormers would make it look more more in line with those recommendations twostory um it's it's um elevation is exactly in line with the same elevation of other surrounding buildings um that white building that is facing the north of this building if we have we do have a photo of it from from our slides um if we have have a minute um the idea of the building that's north of us may have been a garage because you can see that the the the garage doors look like it looks like a garage door the way that it was framed but they put in siding and it's not being utilized as a garage um same with that pink building that yellow building is a garage and the second floor is somebody somebody has lights on at night I don't know what it's used for um so it it does comply with with surrounding areas and and every intention is being made to to meet the historic guidelines in every single way I don't uh hi my name is Pamela vul and I am um here on behalf of this house at 827 Northwest 7th Street if you go back to the picture where you can see um there's some workers sitting there you can see that the uh concrete is elevated and there has been no changes with that that was is exactly the way that it was being if you take a look at it you can see that if you left the concrete the way it is right now it it's impossible to to create um a uh proper driveway into the um structure if even if it was a garage so it I'm just stating that those are guidelines that the city had with bringing that structure up elevated with those with that concrete if we were to create in with this structure more concrete it would increase the footprint and we've talked quite a bit with Katie uh frle regarding footprint and being mindful of that um there would be a lot of change in there but if you imagine if you're walking up this driveway and some staff that are present here has seen it in person there is quite a big step um it probably comes up to how how high would you say that it's about 18 inches it's it's a wall it's say depicted on the on the staff report but it it's about 18 18 in so that's naturally ele ated and when we talk about the height of the structure um we we took a good look at all the the structures around us but the elevation that starts where the concrete is something that the city had already determined needed to be done I'd like to take a moment to uh if you could please go back to one or two slides to the what the building's uh features had as far as the vinyl sighting the previous um Katie is this a already considered a non-conforming structure I mean this that particular I guess what I'm wondering is if there I mean even if it's if it's a non-conforming structure can we even do anything with it you mean the current building the current yeah the one that's getting ready they're proposing to demolish and replace um so if that if we were viewing that as an accessory building then I think it would not be considered non-conforming um you know if they had just rebuilt something very similar to what was there that would have been allowed is that what you mean to rebuild something similar to that yes but to rebuild something completely different and in in place of I'm going to for lack of a better word just call it kind of the Treehouse right now because it's just a bunch of boards and open up on the the front of the property that's what they're proposing to replace right is that non informing structure that's there so I'm not actually clear on what your intention is with the existing current not yet finished structure okay so the most important thing that needs to be addressed is it keeps being discussed as an an an additional structure it has its own address it is its own um address that's historically been there for a very long time so every time we talk about this structure it's being treated as if it's additional to the property and it's not it has its own address but it's one parcel it's it is from lot from doing the survey report it is on its own parcel uh survey report was included in our staff report um upon purchase of the property the survey report uh shows this building um same size um as as as depicted um one one of the characteristics of the house to say uh if it were to be similar we made every adjustment necessary to make it so that it is similar uh to its exact historic counterpart and one of the things I was about to mentioned before that question I would like to identify that all sighting that was on that building um from prop purchase was all vinyl sighting uh no no I would like to get it back to Historic guidelines vinyl sighting is not a part of historic or S and as you look at that picture you can also see that that's not a garage door it's sighting that's correct and that that picture was actually taken in the middle of trying to fix the foundation because this building in particular was falling down um the question with the brick on on the alleyway uh the brick was so deviated that that whole building was about to crash into the other house surrounding and surrounding area to the north um that that was done in in in the best best effort to try to secure the building from falling over and that that's what was in place the foundation has not been been raised uh at even even even the slightest bit it's exactly the same as it was historically not even an inch the whole property is raised the property was raised uh historically it it is in place exactly at elevation the whole the whole the whole property around the whole perimeter I've got a I've got a stem wall around the whole property my my house is elevated 18 in around the whole property and the windows also the vinyl windows can I interrupt you just for one second cuz I'm stuck on this dual property now I didn't see it is that because that to me that would to me that would almost change the Dynamics of this entire thing if that was in fact two separate distinct properties it do it doesn't this is the parcel map this is the property I don't think it matters it is one for the county assessor it is one parcel all of our properties are multiple Lots because these neighborhoods were platted with 25t lots so everybody's on Lots six and seven of block 13 um but it is indicated as one parcel the county I actually looked at this earlier today the county no longer indicates that that building exists I think because it was removed and usually they will show um multiple structures garages even things like tool sheds on the county assessor site um but it just shows building one that you can see here and describes the primary structure um and does doesn't show the um the other building um at this point so so we often have accessory we have garages we have buildings that at one point in time may have been an apartment that have a separate address um but are still all within one parcel um and so we look at those as being accessory to the primary structure so I think all these are um kind of confusing the in my mind what is a pretty clear case um so whether it's one parcel or two you had two historic structures on it at one point in time that's correct so even if it were two Parcels you still would be required to get approval to demolish a structure we just uh denied um probably a building that is as close a lot closer to needing to be demolished than this one and we denied that on 18th Street I believe so had you gone in well let me pause I this is a really unfortunate situation and I'm empathetic to that and I'm and I'm sorry that you're in this situation um but it it there's photographic evidence of a structure that's was there so if we're going to call it its own address it still would need to be approved for de Demolition and then a new design would have to be approved to go in that simulated we did do that if it's a garage an accessory dwelling which I believe is what you would argue this is uh regardless of its address um if there's photographic evidence of a garage two-story structure we require that that be put back in kind we've allowed some modifications with plate Heights uh a foot or so as long as it resembles and I think this particular case doesn't meet that criteria and what also is a heavy weight against you the neighborhood is not in support of it so I don't see anything here that lets this structure as constructed move forward and meet the regulations it needs to be resubmitted um with a massing and a and a and a design design that meets the guidelines we haven't looked at the design yet but may I please address um the mistake that we made with when we tried to repair the building and it falling down um I would just like to we've been coming to these meetings and we really appreciate all the feedback that we get from staff we've learned so much and we want to take that moving forward in everything that we do it's been so appreciated um I know that I have asked um because i' I've heard it in other cases and it's been stated in our case but there there was a comment about when somebody makes a mistake and in our case the structure was not salvageable it it fell down in our case we made a mistake and the consideration of would it have been approved had they did it can we go to the can we go to the design slides next uh for for where we're at I think I think what I'm saying is the massing and the size and the design of it would not the the demolition of the existing building likely would not have been approved and then a reconstruction of an accessory building that exceeds the square footage and the massing requirements um would also not have been approved the lot size has has the same implications here we we actually use the same boundary lines in the process of our application today we we did submit all of these design features I would like to move to that point in the meeting if I could please show the design features and show where where the appropriateness has has been made it is similar in in every single way to the original it is our highest and best possible way to get it to look as historic as we can and be able to have fit Form and Function and meet all the guidelines and also the what you could say is accessory struct structures in all surrounding neighborhoods they are all the same footprint that pink house there the yellow house there the the light one there they're all the same footprint is this one here today and that's all down the same Alleyway um one of the things um keeper of addresses um I have paperwork for that that he said that the or would have been able to look this up um on their on their own but I've got that from from them but it was potentially the the word word is synomous when you were to say 827 7 and a half Northwest 17th Street also to say 1808 North Francis Avenue they're they're synomous and I can share this if if you haven't already done that that research with the with the the CI I even in the photographs there's a on the on the house itself it says 1808 but I think what we heard from staff today is that you can have multiple addresses on one parcel of land and the one parcel of land is the issue not the fact that there's multiple addresses and we could we could do it either either way based on guidelines from historic preservation today we we don't mind having it 18 827 and a half or 1808 it's very important to I don't think that those that with staff multiple times and we've made lots of changes according to the recommendations the what you have currently is the most recent recommendations that there are different there are differences from the previous we were trying to make it look exactly like the structure excuse me except for we were moving some doors and maybe some windows and then just a little bit it wasn't fully uh two-story so the one that's you per you have currently includes more Aesthetics that were recommended it's it's to meet it's to meet the exact recommendation we have from staff is is what we have here present today we have detailed the exact specifications for the windows the door and and if you have any more recommendations if we can have that presented so we can actually get those kind of changes and have a conversation with staff but but this is our highest and final project there there's there's been countless meetings with staff three time three meetings with staff to get this to the app app most the most appropriateness one of the key details I'd like to identify is the change to the roof uh if you look if if you were to look at the top left corner of the roof we have more of a flat roof it's slightly slightly um graved U one degree it's it's almost flat and it it's in best Guidance with historic preservation we added the Dormers based on that recommendation as well we don't mind not having Dormers but it does meet the criteria to try to get this building back to Historic standards and and the house not very nearby that's really beautiful that was our example we have looked at other houses in order it looks lovely it also looks like a second single family residence on the property I mean I it previously was a box previously a box it still doesn't look good box it well box of windows but it had that diagonal wall it's a the historic historically has a diagonal wall we did we did the flat roof as recommended um it you know the the the um if you were to say the shutters are not best use for this property no problem we don't have to have shutters we dressed it up because last last meeting we made we made it sound it sounded like some had question if it was going to be an apartment the answer is no but it does say in in the last um the documents that we have here says that it was it was submitted as a um so what use was it made in historically uh apparently it has AP as a half address however we don't plan to use it as an apartment we don't use it we don't intend to to rent it out as as such we intend to occupy it as our office space and he's trying he's trying to make it accessible for me because I cannot climb his stairs in in the main house it's too many stairs I can't do it we currently have um his computer desk in the living room and it it doesn't fit with the home um he recently red did his floors like everything about it looks horrible um and it's just not it's not feasible to to expect that um he's purchased this property he's worked hard to to address every issue um we will likely have somebody one of our neighbors be coming up and speaking and they they always say we never approached them and had a conversation with them we have had neighbors that have approached us we don't know who everybody is we're the new ones it would be appropriate for us to be approached it's different but to go along with that we we have spoke to we have almost every single person in the nearby block um and certainly the ones that have been at this meeting the attendants one of the individual uh neighbors that actually had the biggest voice in this uh has sold the house last month there are new owners uh she is she was I'd say there's probably three in total that have had the most voice um um from the ones that actually attended the meetings and we talked to each and every one of them so we did meet those those questions we had um been asked two months ago to talk to our neighbors we have talked to our neighbors the gentleman that's in this room that about to speak uh after us uh we did talk to him as well and it was a friendly gesture uh kind conversation and and uh offered more time to spend if we wanted to talk about any any details that he would rather see or if he wanted to talk about what the use is going to be and we did talk about those ideas and what I'm presenting today is the same conversation and and I I I would I would like to say if you can find this building in its structure appropriate I know the historic preservation is going to have the use is is one of the questions but the historic preservation job essentially is to look at the outside does it meet the does it meet the historic guidelines is the siding being used going to be in order is the roof materials going to be in order is the door which is original do you think that that approximates a single family home say what do you think that this building approximates a single family home could you define the word approximate C does does this when you look at that if you were driving down the street and you didn't know this property would you think that that's somebody's office or would you think that that's potentially a second house on the lot or a but is that really the area of question like the use of it it is okay so one of the things that we have talked about multip times is what we plan to use this property for and we we keep on saying it and it doesn't matter what we say it's always brought back up um I and also the way that it's designed currently is based off of Staff recommendation to help it build to blend in and look beautiful in the neighborhood it previously was an eyesore and it was falling it was dangerous the windows were were it was just it was a block um this house is is beautiful and what we have right now the neighbors are not happy we aren't either we want this to change we want it to be beautiful we want the neighbors to agree that it's beautiful where it stands right now it's not okay but we also cannot keep on coming back and being told that we have to build a garage it's never been a garage what what I'd like to add to that is we have a professional contractor he's licensed bonded insured with the with the city of well the state and he he is he is well versed in historic guidelines and and he was going to be present but he had other arrangements however uh licensed Bond and insured we will not be doing any work that's not licensed Bond and insured on this property and that's one thing I'd like to say one other thing is is is is one one of the things I would like to mention is also the original building had had to have some sort of renovation that was not according to the store preservation guidelines so what we're trying to do is try to try to get two historic guidelines and that is the whole method that we're trying to get to New sing because it was vinyl new windows because it was vinyl the original door was not well-kept it needed to be renovated so we were able to keep the original door um if you were to say is it look like a single family well because it has beautiful shutters well I added the beautiful shutters because the last guideline that you had had said that since it's a facing the road the stairs aren't going to be adequate so we made those changes and we wanted to make it look as beautiful as we can shutters cost a lot of money so if you want to say no shutters no shutters if you want to say all wood windows all wood windows I can do CL I can do Lum clad I could do wood I want to meet your criteria I want this to be a beautiful place we've learned a lot in this process and listened to staff on everything and there will not be anything with this building that is not already discussed like we we've just heard the last people with the windows that's really good information to know and we're we're learning from this yes we've been here listening to other people's stories and things that they're working on and we're like oh okay wow learning something from and continue to work with staff to make sure that it's appropriate in the entry way guys we wanted to keep we we've been going at this for a long time I I know I've heard chirps from other Commissioners up here that want to ask questions so let's let them get their questions out we also need to check with the public to see what they have to say on this particular project we we can't stay on this all day if there's anything that you want to just hit us with some really good information that you think you know give us your best punch on this one because we're going to come back to you with something that you're probably not going to like here shortly I I'd like to address that this building is very much the way that we're trying to make it is very much like all the other buildings in the area we have them across the alley from us excuse me across the alley from us across the street diagonal we have neighbors who all their their paint is peeling it's an iore they're not addressing it we're trying to address it we don't don't want a building that's falling down that's going to be a be a danger to anybody we don't want an isore we hate the way it is right now just like all of our neighbors we are asking for exactly the same thing that a lot of our neighbors have nothing more nothing less okay we've spent we've spent a lot of money and a lot of time uh getting the software and and Ching all these changes we've worked closely with with licensed contractors to get this designed and one of the things I'd like to say is the exact footprint is the same we're not changing the concrete we're not changing the footprint we're not changing anything more than was already presently there and what we're trying to do is get get it back to Historic guidelines and get it back to to fit the fit the the uh the area that it's in and I was going to say is the the if if you were to say it's a little bit too decorated that front porch doesn't have to be there I I just wanted to try to make you feel like I'm trying I'll spend as much money as you like as much time as you like to get this to look exactly the way you think that it needs to look for our neighborhood I want to do it for the community let's hear from the commission anybody from the public that wants to speak on this I want to see I want to get questions out here because I know I've heard oh yeah some things um I was to say even outside of it's you know footprint size or the demolition issues or anything I think the biggest issue with the design of this as is proposed like I know you said that you're trying to look at other you know second um properties you know around you other Parcels that have maybe an Adu or a garage or something if they have an Adu then that's okay that it looks more like a residence this is not an Adu this is just an accessory structure you will not be using it as a home so it should not look like a single family home and right now that's exactly what it looks like sandborn map show a one and a half or twostory building um historically this is like two and a half Story I mean the ridge of the roof is 5 foot below your three story home it's very tall um um you know I think is it the Dormer that you're res saying the two and a half or I mean it looks like it's a two and a half story right now because it's only 5 feet shorter than your three-story home we added that dorm right I see where that may say suggests it's larger it's it's just decorative like driving by I see this I think that is another home on the site and I think that's the commission's biggest issue with this design as proposed even I said outside of the demolition or outside of the footprint size some of that elevation is from the way that the city decided it needed to be the whole lot had to be elevated that's right so that that's why it makes it look a lot larger bigger but it's not but it's the same height it's the surrounding SE secondary structures we we we proposed we just did some research on what this historically is we just want to present it what it historically was we just wanted to get built you we can call it whatever address we can call it a second structure um we can not even include Domer so it doesn't look like it's so tall I I don't I truly don't mind I just want to get it built the issue is the issue is there's there was an existing fabric so all the all the discussions and things and and again I appreciate the effort and if this if if a structure never existed here and you wanted to lot split the back portion of an empty parcel that's a whole different discussion than this discussion unfortunately your property had a historic structure that aided and contributed to the historic fabric of the neighborhood and this structure changes the appearance of that fabric that's the issue for this particular parcel I see the that was never I don't believe that was like that in that method wasn't brought up the last meeting when we had just simple stairs going up because that looks exactly like every other building in that so the the building that was falling down was built way before the historical preservation had started and it was not within guidelines at all can can you go to the pictures that we sent at it's 1910 North Ali the previous structure no can you please go to the picture that I submitted with my application there's pictures that we have yeah help a similar project simar but again look s similar similar that's a different application your project had a historic structure on it so you're unfortunately held to that standard well that's no problem no problem at all I just wanted to show and demonstrate how it looks in the neighborhood it it's not that we're trying to split the property it's not that we're trying to do any further than just simply have the building built and according to the historic guidelines you give it a title but we wanted to show it one block away has just a pretty good look in that neighborhood and I think that's just admirable and I don't think anybody here's questioning whether it is or isn't aesthetically pleasing it's is it appropriate and the fact that it's not consistent with the historic fabric is the Crux of the issue I think so our most our current guidance was to add all of that so that it was aesthetically pleasing our previous application was a lot more plain and that was all that was an issue because it didn't look good we we this application we we did do all of those things this this application that we are talking about today is doing what I believe you're you're saying if I if I'm not mistaken we have done the application process to be able to build this as the design features that we have we we saw one page of the design but I would love to show the inside because that was a question we had I I don't think the inside is our perview and I'd love to hear from the citizens that wish to speak on this project too we've been going at this I have I have one more question is your primary goal here to have a functional workspace in an accessory building in your backyard I think that function would be incredibly useful however getting it built and Simply Built and in in essence getting a roof on it put sing on it appropriate Windows appropriate door is our number one goal today and he he purchased the property with with that building and he's trying to absolutely simply want to roof but what I'm saying is this is it's beautiful this is a lovely drawing this is I and I am not one of the architectural members of the commission so I can't speak to exactly whether or not this would have been approved had a house burned down and we were building a new house I don't know that um but I do know that it seems to me like you guys are in they replace a garage type structure that's two stories of a relatively substantial size under and it would fit guidelines correct it does change the footprint with more concrete it does and it also wouldn't be the same right historically but my point is is if you're I work and my husband and I both work in our converted Garage in an HP neighborhood um I would love to have the amount of space that you have the opport just because we're saying that it that we believe it to to have been an auto house or garage and the accessory driling structure needs to fit within that does not mean that you cannot office with you cannot fit that out as well as you would like and office within it um uh I I don't know what was spoken as far as the guidance you got here to where you got to this frankly really lovely design the challenge is is that it looks like a residential property um and unfortunately because you cannot have two Residential Properties or two things that look or could function as Residential Properties on the same lot that's just not going to fly no matter how pretty we think it is uh no matter what what what specific materials you're willing to put in there I I don't want to speak out of turn but I think that's the Crux of it um so unfor if if you guys are just really wanting a completed structure in your backyard that you can functionally work in I think that you're set up to have that be doable this just is not it and it is not going to get approved today I do not believe and can you okay so you're you're concerned about it looking like its own address but I I was just trying to do some research on what the what the house was used for previously it has its own meter and all that but it's not about it having a separate address it's okay that it has a separate address it's just it's not functioning as a home or an Adu or an apartment so it shouldn't look like a home really appreciate the the feedback that you gave regarding that it could be a garage but then used differently um I I want to make sure that I mention this I hate it but in the consideration with these designs we are considering my disability it is hard for me to get on any kind get on any kind of stairs if we have the lower part of garage that means I have to go in the main house to do anything that I need to do I cannot go up the stairs on the inside or the outside everything has to be main floor are you are you yeah you don't mcde is saying is reduce the size it doesn't have to be two storyals three stories I doesn't have to look like a house it doesn't and it doesn't have to function as a garage in any capacity I have a slight storage area just because we haven't converted it and then two offices next door to each other inside the existing footprint of a 1931 Crown Heights garage um so I mean I think I think that that there is a way back to the drawing board that gets something that meets the historic fabric that is still absolutely functional and I am empathetic and understand that there are some elements of the historic preservation code that might be a challenge with someone with with people persons with disabilities um but I don't think you have to think of it as first floor garage second floor office it you have to think of it as you know replacing the structure that was already there in an aesthetically pleasing historically compatible way with the interior functionality that meets exactly what you need and I it is my understanding that that would be very possible is is that to say that it would have a garage door or could it just have a door because that that maybe that is ex exactly what we have in front of you to I don't I don't mind I I honestly I do not mind if you have guidance that suggest that we do not finish the inside to certain specifications no problem whatsoever honestly wouldn't even hurt my feelings I've spent a lot of time on this wouldn't even be a problem we want to use it as best that we can but our primary goal and honestly our our realistically only goal today is to get a roof on it with a proper setting with proper windows I don't I don't think you're going to get that today I I really I really don't think you're going get sounds like what I'm hearing is the combination of the two different designs that we have we have submitted I've done that already last yes and this is the things that you're seeing that maybe may be um kind of making it different for you ignore that can you go back to the the design for a moment the challenge I think is that you all are asking we like to have it approved without the shutters without anything that you guys have an issue with the challenge is that looks like a house hold on time out the challenge is you're asking us to to continue to design your all's project and we can't continue to design your project what I will tell you is that there are guidelines and rules that you can go to to design your own project we we did we we added we can't we can't sit here today and help you guys continue to design it we've given you feedback from the commission to I I I've I've submitted two separate complete applications the first application neither of them were fully complete neither of them were fully complete there was information missing there were things that we needed from you guys that we never got one of one of the applications had the footprint for the garage that was there and that was the original thought process we took that into consideration with our new design we can keep the exact footprint of this building and still meet the criteria that you have I I I I truly do think you can delete we can we cannot approve anything today if you're going to come with come to us with a different design different footprint whatever the case may be no no different no no change to the footprint it all all I'm trying to get to here today is weather um roof siding I don't have to put any Windows anywhere we can cut them out exactly to your to your specifications I mean we truly can we we truly truly can I think that the application we can only approve or deny the application that's before us today with some slight modifications or kicking things back slightly for administrative review and unfortunately we appreciate we appreciate the way that you're speaking we appreciate your willingness to work um we absolutely understand the hardships of this the financial expense of this unfortunately I do not believe there is any way that this is getting out of commission today with anything less than a denial with prejudice and a restarting of the process it's too far from anything we can approve and unfort and for the sake of this being item two of nine uh we probably are going to have to move on on this and and I and I don't believe there's anything that you can say that would change that Core Fact understandable if you don't don't mind I just want to I want to state that all the modifications that we've made in each meeting has been with staff like conversation but we're getting some different feedback on to what people think it it should look like we have a lot of opinions going on and he's trying to design it and then it comes to you and there's something you that everybody doesn't want but we don't know that we we're trying it's changing and we've made those changes every time six times we get along with our neighbors we want we want to be able to talk to our neighbors and not have this issue they're sick of looking at it and so are we sure it's an iter IT iterative process you bring changes we suggest changes you bring changes we suggest changes that's how that goes that's always how this is going to go so but we do we do need to move on to Citizens so I want to I want to set you guys down for a second and I want to hear from the citizens anybody else that wish to participate or or visit about this particular project and please state your name and my name is Andy Sullivan I live at 9:15 Northwest 17th Street my wife Sue and I moved into our house in 9915 in 1976 when it was called The Comeback neighborhood um and it was I was told to people that employed me that it was not a nice neighborhood to live in so we've been a part of trying to get historic preservation throughout this time um I'm representing a group of people in the 800 and 900 block of 17 18th and 19th uh 16 17th and 18th we're opposed to his um um his request I realize that you all I'm going to read this because I don't want to take up too much time so I realized that this commission really only deals with the appropriateness of construction and remodeling of exterior structures in historic neighborhoods what I'm presenting speaks to the veracity of Mr vul's request for the need and ined utilization of the addition on the Alley I recently introduced myself to Mr vul we went to the alley and he explained why the existing structures could not be converted or reverted to parking structures I cannot speak for my other neighbors but I have concluded that enforcement of group housing is exceedingly difficult if not impossible um I asked Mr vul um at that time that I I told him that I said you're you're operating a group house and I don't think that we can do anything about that he said no no no you don't understand it's me and my mother and my daughter live there and I have family and friends that come people well I'm sorry this is my no sir you keep keep addressing the commission if you don't mind I'm sorry if you don't I just address the commission please keep addressing the commission yes okay thank you so anyway um I told him that all I really want him to do was tear that structure down it's an iord it's been there for two years it's been turned down by you all for two times um he he and turn I saw someone going into the house recently from their car I asked how much it would cost for somebody to come stay on the weekend and they said well you'd have to talk to him because they stay there people live there other people live there so um anyway he told me that he was not doing that any anyway they block the sidewalk blah blah blah recently I went to his mailbox to put a request in there to have the people block so that they did not park so they did not block the access to the sidewalk it's a handicapped access and I put a note on one car that person moved their car others quickly filled that space up at the time that I did that I wasn't snooping but I looked in the window and in the downstairs North Southeast room he's making it into a kitchen this is a structure that had three separate levels of people living in it by the previous owner topic' there's a there's a cabinet with sink there's there's a refrigerator sitting on the front porch and other cabinets if he wanted office space he could have easily converted that to office space uh recently um okay and I asked him about the existing structure oh the structure on ol that they're addressing was there in 1976 when we moved in it's a very attractive there it preceded uh historic preservation I've tried and I can find no evidence that the denial by this commission has been reviewed by the board of adjustment our neighbors are very frustrated by having this weather-beaten dilapidated frame sitting on our neighborhood that was started without a building permit it's a hazard to any children who might be tempted to enter the structure is our hope that Mr vul's request will be tonight I thank you for your consideration thank you do anybody else wish to speak on this particular project okay come on back up I'm make a motion okay I would like to apologize to the committee for me interrupting BEC but we had a conversation regarding some of the off topic it is not okay that a neighbor is looking through our windows it's not okay we're going to go and it was off topic it's inappropriate everything that's in that house was already there when he purchased it it's not okay that neighbors think it's okay to come over into his property and Snoop around and stick their face in the window it's not okay ation house he's doing renovations and beautifying this house stop we've heard everything from you the commission sir the commission is now going to vote on a motion okay that that is it I make a motion forca 23148 to deny with prejudice want to say something we have a second she got a little move by commissioner por second by commissioner gains please vote in Prime goov can I get a little guidance on on the specific we need to know what you're not approving it needs to be specific because we're confused at this point too many opinions the entire case was denied with prejudice I understand Molly you had asked if he looked for a certain way you said if it looked more like a garage or whatnot what is it that would look the best so what staff has been advising for many months is that you need to propos a structure that very closely approximates the historic structure that is sufficiently documented in photographs it doesn't have to be a garage it probably doesn't even have to have a garage door because that door faced into the backyard and was not highly visible from the street but something that has the massing the size the roof form the height the architectural details of the historic structure is what would easily be approved on the consent docket um the other thing is it also has to be accurately drawn we need to know that you are going to meet applicable setbacks per building code we need to know where all the paving is where the driveways are where the sidewalks are where are you parking a vehicle if you're parking a vehicle on the site I think that was a lot of the issue with the first round was not so much there were concerns about the design and proportions of the structure but a lot of it was that it was not well drawn um there were doors floating in the air and things on the site plan that were unclear but you were kind of on a path towards something that was approximating the form of the historic garage we've gone way far away from the historic structure that was there I think something I one thing I will say to you too is the structure that you have now that framing that wood all of those structural components have been exposed to the weather for a year and a half and are likely going to have to be removed whether you get approved to go on or not and that'd be permit permit wise right that'd be a building perit that's another that's another governing body I just wanted to get past the point where historic says it's appropriate we did adhere to every single guideline it is the exact same form as socii I just I simply don't understand we're changing in and email we're changing we're we're being asked to make it look more like a garage but that's not what those I'm being told to make it store guys we are moving on to item number four six times I've been here six times we very much appreciate your comments we very much appreciate the dialogue back and forth there has been a motion the motion has been voted on there is an appeals process I suggest you go that route we're going to move on to item number four thank you we appreciate your time item number four h next 23 I'm I'm so sorry but about the way a year I don't understand what this means so denial with prejudice means you cannot resubmit this application for a year if you come back with a different application with different information documentation plans drawings then that can be resubmitted at any time we just can't take a carbon copy of what we have before us today and reconsider it again thank you for your time thank you thank you okay excuse me we will move on to item number four hpca 23157 at 225 Northwest 27th Street this is Jefferson Park War 2 consideration and possible action on application by sin Rin my roof solar from Maria claraval for certificate of appropriateness to one install solar panels and related mechanical equipment elective the commission saw this once before uh the applicant has revised their proposed design to move the solar panels um as far out of um the line of sight as is possible um they are still technically minimally visible from the street but they've done a really nice job of working with their the roof form and the placement of the solar to ensure that um you're going to have to stand in a very particular spot and look in just the right way to catch a glimpse of those solar panels um staff has recommended approval of this with uh unique circumstances excellent can you please say your name and address for the record please Jennifer Meyer thank you uh personally I've looked at this application I really like it I'm a big fan of solar panels I love the fact that the applicant has made every single effort to uh move the panels to a place where they are as Katie mentioned very very minimally visible from the street I think there's certainly unique circumstances on this particular property I would be in support I would be in favor of an approval I agree I agree um it's a pretty low sloped roof anyway um and you know we're working with with updated guidelines right now to include language that allows very minimally visible solar panels anyway um you know they've come back and um take into consideration things we said before so I'm in favor of approving it as well do we have any citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project you have other questions from Commissioners can I make a motion I'd love a motion a move approval hpca d23 d157 with specific findings and unique circumstance is listed in the staff report second move by commissioner Milner second by commissioner Whitley please vote in Prime go okay that was passed unanimously congratulations that all right moving on to item number five hpca 23165 at 2208 Northwest 28th Street this is uh this is Jefferson Park but this is actually Shephard sorry um this is uh Shephard W two consideration of possible action on application by Boden Properties Inc for a certificate of appropriateness to one replace windows required two replace garage doors elective four remove walls on existing porch Edition in rear yard and replace with seeder post elective five remove awnings required and six remove shutters required so as you can tell there's some items that have already been um either initiated or completed there are some other items that are um just proposed at this time uh staff has recommended approval of the removal of the walls that were enclosing the historic porch um and removal of the awnings um we can administratively approve reinstallation of awnings if at some point in time someone wanted to um put those back uh we have recommended continuance on the replacement of the windows the um uh replacement of the garage doors and removal of the shutters um on all of those it's kind of needing further documentation of products that meet the applicable guidelines um for both the the windows and the garage door on the shutters um it appears those may have been a historic feature we would want to um staff would want to see more information to confirm that those were not original to the structure before approving their removal without them being replaced with something comparable okay talk to us about your project state your name and address for the record too please I'm sorry state your name name and address for the record Ferris 208 Northwest 28 uh let's see several things looks like staff recommended approval on there are some continuance items specifically Windows garage door shutters um looks like some of the materials that we need more documentation on materials um talk to us about about those particular items if you don't mind I submitted the new proposal for Windows um over the weekend I was Tardy on getting it to you for this meeting so have we seen those they are we did not get those sorry we did we did not get that in time to get into your packet or to really be fully evaluated by staff okay so we'll probably need a continuance on those items regardless so that we can get time or do you think that's something we could visit about today and if they meet stands can they be applicant if you want to briefly describe what that additional window documentation was it was u a wood clad window that was required I believe I'm I'm not familiar with this process but we're we're doing what we can do what's there is is not correct and what is uh there is uh we will return that to the original W openings I got the bid for the original openings and you have the specification to what we're proposing to put in okay so we could um and I'm sorry I haven't looked at at the new material that's been sent in so I can't say for sure that that that what's been sent meets the guidelines if the applicant's intent is to install a replacement window that meets the applicable guidelines then we could approve that with a condition that that the windows meet applicable guidelines for materials at a window replacement and then applicant can work with staff to make sure that either what he's submitted checks those boxes or if not we can modify from there um or we can continue it just thinking about what what would let the applicant move forward uh do you have any comment on the uh condition of the existing garage doors and shutters that staff is wanting to keep if possible I have submitted with the same paperwork uh replacement garage doors so what staff wants to see um is that they want to see proof that the existing garage doors are deteriorated Beyond repair because we always try to um fix or keep anything that was original or historic um so do I was just going to ask if like you had s in anything more that showed that yes these are rotted we can't replace them or anything of that matter I've submitted pictures of the window so I and the garage door I'm sorry garage doors okay I mean looking at the garage doors they look like they're in pretty bad disrepair look pretty rough I would be in favor of an approval on the garage if it's um I guess we don't have we don't have the materials for the new garage door yet to review okay would that be administra so replacing replacing garage doors with a door that meets the guidelines can be administratively approved as you know wouldn't even require commission review in the first place um so yeah that could be something that is approved with condition that the appropriate materials are submitted to staff and that would be the same with the shutters um yes if you all feel like the shutters need to be put back on shutters are kind of you know sometimes we have shutters that are not historic that were just stuck on at some point on this style of house in this neighborhood it's a little more common that we do see historic shutters that were part of the original um design I I will say from I guess commission standpoint I'm not dead set on having shutters put back on the house either too so I I could also support an approval for I'm assuming is he wanting to go away you're wanting to go away from shutters completely correct yeah um so I I you know I guess like I'm wondering if we could get to an approval on removing the walls and modifying the awning the garage door and shutters with you know the windows to be administratively approved as long as they fit the guidelines yeah windows and garage door yeah yeah we like it do we have any citizens that wish to speak on this particular project okay well we a motion I'd love a motion question please yes sir the on the removal of the wall is that U as post or is it okay yeah not this game I move approval of hpca d23 D z165 I'm sorry am I yeah yep okay uh items four and five with specific findings as listed in the staff report and then I hope I'm hearing this right I uh items one and two with specific findings in the staff report however that the appropriate documentation has been submitted will be submitted will be submitted yeah with condition that with the condition that the appropriate documentation will be submitted and are we approving removal of the shutters and item six removal of the shutters is that approving it yes correct is that what we said yeah yeah okay do we have a second second move by commissioner Milner second by commissioner Whitley please vote in Prime go okay that item passes unanimously thank you okay moving right along to item number six hpca 24003 at 14 17 Northwest 35th Street this is puam high score 2 consideration of possible action on application by Fallon Brooks Magnus Jolly Bird design for Michael and Emily Fagan for certificate of appropriateness to two construct two-story Edition elective and three construct one and a half story garage elective um the commission saw this one previously some modifications have been made to the proposal um most uh notably the removal of the connection between the addition and the garage staff has recommended approval of the construction of the garage we did still recommend a an continuance of the addition staff remains concerned about the size the form um kind of window configuration on the proposed addition um it is in the backyard it is um sort of midblock except it's by a parking lot um but still just looking at compatibility with the historic structure perfect thank you hello name and address for the record yes uh Fallon Brooks Magnus 733 Northwest 22nd Street representing the applicant okay well I am also supportive of staff's recommendation to approve uh the construction of the garage um I think we need to talk about potentially the size and some of the additional information that might be needed on the addition yeah um as far as additional information goes it's really just materials it's um you know submitting products and you know riding The Struggle Bus I actually really appreciated your comment last time when you said the reason we don't have all the materials all the time is because that changes from from the customer perspective I thought that was a great response so we haven't submitted them all so um as far as the massing of the structuring I talked about this last month the reasoning for the elongated addition was to minimize the impact that it has on the historic structure so the narrower that addition is the less of the existing home we are tearing apart to add on to it so in reality from this image here we're going to lose one those two windows there that are by that back door um and that's really all we're going to lose in terms of historic windows or anything like that that narrowness of that presented a design constraint for us so in order to fit excuse me done uh in order to fit everything in there uh it got a little longer and then um you know the second floor is under the roof line and so that increases the square footage of the second floor a little bit uh and so what we walked away with last month was you know commission had said that they were okay with the massing but staff wanted some changes to some windows and and various other things so we made those changes we still haven't provided the uh mat materials list but it's a pretty standard submission um so that's that's where we're at the um the I guess pivot to a more narrower design based off some of the comments from last time I do recall us saying this is a really really big lot and so the the set fact that it is oversized didn't feel like that was as as big of an issue as as as it generally is potentially for the commission um um but it it sounds like we just need additional documentation right now I I feel like this image here just kind of look pretty ridiculous look at the house next door it's really big yeah it's like they forgot the second half of this house in comparison to the one next to it yeah um and so in terms of area footprint all that we're pretty comparable with every other house on the street we're not exceeding and I think we also decided that it is very minimally visible is that right too yeah and that's the the other reason to make it the way that we did was to make it minimally visible so you you have to go you know off of 35th all the way across the other side of class and to really be able to see it um but your eye isn't going to be drawn to that it's going to be drawn to the mural on the wall the giant that building right next to it like it's it's got a lot of other sort of visual things happening in that area and there is a note here that says um are we intending no changes to the front of the front elevation of the house no changes to the front elevation the only thing that remains on the front elevation was the storm door okay um I again not provided that um but I feel like that's another thing that's administratively approvable probably we have a here I can show you and this may have been something that was intended to be the side door on the addition because that appears to have a similar awning this is in the resubmittal and said propos front elevation and we had talked about oh H that's a mistake okay okay that's where we were unclear I see what you're saying drew the porch yeah roof this is the awning over the door on the side because we got rid of the walkway yes um is really so that's just mislabeled at the bottom so we just need to clarify that that's for the Edition that's okay we we just that wasn't what I was expecting to see yeah I'm no intention to do anything to the front now we removed that okay I'm be honest the length or proportions of the addition doesn't bother me too much especially when you take into consideration the house next door and then on the other side you have commercial which could that maybe be like a unique circumstance I mean because it's not a typical surrounded on all sides by I mean I I think that the the minimal visibility of the addition is always a factor that we incorporate when we talk about size of an addition or a garage or whatever I mean and if it still meets the lot coverage um you know and you're doing minimal um you're trying to keep minimal work to the existing building as is which um I appreciate so personally I would be fine as it is but because it feels like if you're standing on the street looking at this house I'm not going to see the addition right no not with be far to the side or not unless you're really looking for I mean it is visible from across Classen it will be um but like if you're going 40 m hour down Classen or if I'm driving 50 um there's you know you catch a glimpse of it that's about all you're going to see but if you're driving down 35th you're not going to see it um you know if you're sorry that's a boulevard there too and I think that the definition of or the rules say across the street so if you are standing in the yard of the house across the street there's no possible way true not visible at all do we have any citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project concerned citizen not a citizen oh so I wanted to make a note uh I did not make it into the staff report but I believe fell in correct me if I'm wrong uh she had mentioned that since they are demolishing the garage it has the stone veneer and the stone veneer that they're taking off for the proposed Edition that they said that they were willing to reuse that in the addition I like I just wanted and it's not on the elevations here but I can certainly put it on the elevations if staff wants to prove it um but yeah we so we're willing to do that there's some there's enough Stone being removed cool I like that sir did you wish to speak sure come on up name and address for the record please Ken Chancellor 3703 North McKinley Avenue I live in putam Heights just around the block from there this is a good a good proposal uh the house that's next store uh is a replacement property that was built prior to 1972 when we got the HP preservation district and it was there was a house fire or something there that burned in 69 something like that and it's not not historic it's just there so I would suggest that you approve this thank you thank you okay do we have a motion all motion approval of hpca d24 d003 item one uh with specific findings and we still need that condition in there are there I think it's item three it's items two and three I on the wrong no oh I just was reading the item three I'm sorry yeah item three with specific findings but there is a condition underneath that one the documentation of all exterior materials be submitted do you still need that okay yes um am I doing that one alone or or you can do it all together if you want to okay and I'm going to add as approval in there item two with specific findings as noted in the staff report do you want to condition on that one because do you still need additional documentation for materials I think a condition um and then the additional condition that the stone can be reused okay yes and I might add unique circumstances that it's not visible from the street and unique circumstances that's not visible from the street and those conditions were that additional documentation is needed with materials and that you'll be using I I've missed Stone and materials from Stone and materials from the garage okay was thank you okay move by commissioner Milner second by commissioner gains please vote in Prime go thank you okay that item passes unanimously thank you thank you is this your last is this your last meeting it is it is I know I just want to say thank you so much I know I started working bringing cases before the commission I probably four or five years ago and in the beginning I did not like you oh wow that's fair but you have you have over time I feel like we've gotten to know each other you have been a really I think a great asset to the commission so I'm going to be sad to see you go thank you so thank you so much L of people be thrilled being honest did did you have any uh comments about Fallon that you yeah no I'm not going to have record I just want op to know or Oklahoma City P feeding a lot you know just make sure class and Boulevard after that comment say that in a city building and that's your plaque yeah exactly yes you wanted we have had a five minute break requested okay let's do a five minute break we'll recess at 407 yeah e okay Keith can you go ahead and call this meeting back to order nice timing fudge present gains present Milner present po present Ry present excuse me McBride present Whitley present pres who oh I'm sorry great we have Quorum all right we will get right back into it we will uh start with item number seven hpca 24008 at 101 Northwest 19th Street this is Heritage Hills Eastward six consideration of possible action on application by Jessica hearnen 10 key remodels for Candace Arnold for certificate of appropriateness to two replace a pair of windows at west side of the North End of the dwelling with shorter pair elective um this is a interior remodel that has triggered a request to modify the window opening so that the windows are shorter um they are in a location where they are um minimally visible or not visible from the street uh set back to the extent that we would the guidelines um would support the installation of new windows in this location on the house and we have over time interpreted that to um support modification to existing Windows as well um that that location on the house is far enough back and minimally visible enough for that to be appropriate um the one issue with this and why it was not on the consent docket is is that the windows that are proposed are a simulated divided light um window that the guidelines did not support soim um do you mean what makes them simulated or why did they propose simulated divided light um I do not know that's just the product that they included in their application packet so okay can you please state your name and address for the record excellent thank you so I pretty sure you heard all of the the discussion around windows and making sure that those are dialed in and above board and perfect these ones are not quite there I think we need windows that are there I would be in favor of a continuance unless you have some windows that you've reled to show us today and say these are going in talking with staff um about what the guidelines required versus simulated and true divided light um we're more than happy to install and purchase pill windows that are true divided light well then I would support an approval with conditions that they so show that with staff the the question that I have and and I think I'm the loone ranger on Windows um and conflict with the guides the concern that I have is the existing windows are single pain true divided light when and you're only adjusting a couple correct yes so the result of forcing a true divided light product with dual Paine insulated glazing is your mutton is going to be wider than the rest of the house on those specific windows so it will not aesthetically look the same on the outside of the house whereas I would argue a simulated divided light with the same profile would much more closely approximate the historic consistency with the rest of the windows you are a smart architect and I am not and I will agree with that assessment so and we have had this come up before particularly on Windows like these that have they're not just just a uh 4 over one or 6 over one they're you know lots of that's a nine light Windows um so when you have that many Ms and that many panes of glass that that glass portion is going to get really small when you have a thicker true divided like M um we have had people come in with a comparison of here's the existing historic M Dimensions here's what I can get to with a true divided light mton here's what I can get with a simulated divided light and in some cases we've approved the simulated because it was going to as David said be more aesthetically in keeping with the um character of the historic Windows than than a true divided light so that's certainly something that the commission could consider um either just on the basis of this conversation or you could if you felt like you needed further proof of that to go in the record we could ask the applicant to provide that comparison um either way staff is comfortable with any and all of those options so um whatever you all feel good with do we have any citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project okay great I mean the other option would be to go back and I don't even know if they make them anymore a a single pain true divided light I think that would be the ideal because I don't know that you're really gaining energy efficiency of two windows but do you have a preference or does it matter I don't believe we have a preference my understanding is that our goal is to replicate in kind as close as possible while getting a not damaged and beond repair product out of curiosity and this has no bearing on the approval but what's the what's the room that it's adjacent to like what what interior room will it serve MH uh a kitchen well it's above washer and dryer that would be in a kitchen so that's why we're raising it I'm just trying to think if there's any freezing or functional reason why you would want that okay do we have a motion he's working commissioner Remy would staff want the final window submitted for approval okay I will make a motion uh I make a motion to approve hpca 24008 with the specific findings as stated in the staff Report with the additional condition that the final product be submitted to staff for their approval and that the commission would be in support of either a simulated divided light or a a dual pane simulated divided light or a single pane true divided light that the muttons approximate the existing historic muttons what a great motion do we have a second I'll second yeah why wouldn't you want to second that one uh move by commissioner Emy second by commissioner Whitley please vote in Prime code you just give me an options okay that is approved with conditions and passed unanimously thank you thank you moving on to item number eight hpca 2411 at 1815 North Hudson Avenue this is in Heritage Hills w six consideration and possible action on application by Jared wein Gardner for a certificate of appropriateness to one construct pergola elective this is um a Pergola at a corner lot and it is in the street side corner of the yard so um the concerns with this were that based on the height proposed for the pergola and the height of the existing brick fence wall that you see there the a good portion of the top of the pergola would be visible above and beyond that fence um in addition the applicant has um proposed to put an acrylic um panel material over the roof of the pergola that appears to be visible um and guidelines generally don't support that type of a product on the roof of a Pergola we did recommend um approval with condition that the height be reduced and that the acrylic be eliminated from The Proposal hi there can you say your name and address for the record yeah my name is Jared we gner I live at 1815 North Hudson cool are you good with the conditions that staff has laid out here and reducing to no more than 9 ft and taking the panels off the top so the reason that we we originally looked at a 9ft Pergola the problem is is that the grade of the patio where we want to put this is actually not one grade with the the first floor there's there's about a three and a half to 4T drop and so whenever you put a 9ft Pergola it actually if you see where we have the covered patio right there it puts the pergola eyeline like right across that that door which I feel like um would be a little awkward it blocks The View I mean just um and so you know after looking at it I thought i' had submitted photos too that showed like a a tape measure that we showed the two Heights and it's really that there's actually a lot of slope slope on the on the yard going to it so from the street or from the adjacent across the street it's not as visible as it appears from like this specific angle um I mean you can see that uh it's it's a pretty tall wall um as for the acrylic panels uh we really want covered patio that's that's the whole goal of this we we love to eat outside we love to be outside it rains we can't use our furniture for 3 days while it it dries and we also would like some additional shading I know the perow without the material we'll provide that but I've got three small children we again we spend most of our time outside and would love to be able to to have some covered eating I did look around the neighborhood I I did not check to see whether they did CA but I found at least four other pergas that have the same material that are visible from the street just walking along the neighborhood and so I again I didn't check to see but it seems like it's a pretty common practice the material is easily removable at some point in the future and the Perle is not attached to any historic Fabric or historic cement so the the pergola could be removed at some point to restore it to the original historic condition I think those are all pretty reasonable um you know I I can get there with you on the the height uh that particular component I think in favor of eliminating the acrylic panels but I I hear you when you say they're kind of the reasons why I just I know they're not supported um and I think we can I certainly think we can come up with a unique circumstance for the height I don't know that there is one for the plastic yeah we also recently denied out pergas with acrylic tops so I was going to say the same yeah I just don't know if I can get there on the acrylic because we've we've been denying them yeah so how are there ones probably c yeah feel free to report them yeah please don't they get a CA for the pergola and then go back later and stick the panels on okay not to do that I guess my next question would be how do I get actual cover outside patio then so the guidelines allow for all sorts of accessory landscape features structures um and you could propose something that is just an open-sided roofed structure with an appropriate roof material would that have to be tile roof to match the no it wouldn't have to match your house it wouldn't have to be a tile roof and it could be a a flat roof um okay just not a with a if the acrylic is not visible is that so we have seen some people propose I think pergas where some sort of structure was set within the rafters the slats of the pergola so that you couldn't so that it was actually a solid roof but you couldn't see that it was solid unless you were right underneath it looking up kind of like that support acrylic there I mean there's a materials concern with the acrylic um but some other material might be appropriate I would make sure to think through if you're trying like just debris litter and stuff and how you you would keep that clean if you're trying to hide it in between panels and yeah I mean maybe a solid roof would be a better I don't know yeah I think that's a tricky detail you're going to get wood rot potentially could they use something like um a cover over that I mean I guess that would be more noticeable but something that's not permanent like a sale or you know some sort of thing like that yeah that's the thing I we can put a per like again the goal is covered patio covered area that we can be outside and acrylic like I looked at a bunch of different products across including some more expensive like lver systems and things like that that just didn't think seem like they would fit it would be a lot more noticeable I mean yeah you you could make it look a lot worse than acrylic with temporary stuff so are you wanting the look of a Pergola or are you wanting the look of a detached structure or I mean I guess that's my question it's more about function to me then I I want something that we can cover that area so it actually gets used a lot more and so a perula seemed like the most fitting just driving by and see it would look like hyola the the material wouldn't be that visible it's very thin it does have a gray to so you don't get debris um and keeps you know water off the furniture I think the pergola idea is the most minimally invasive kind of like you suggested which I appreciate that that going down that route I just think that because because of where we're at and the what we've approved and not approved in the past it's really almost impossible for us to approve a Perlo with an acrylic panel on the top of it so I might even suggest coming back with a structure that is more functional that you like more that wouldn't have materials that were specifically excluded and and I'm curious what the and I I haven't I apologize for my ignorance here with the guidelines but to me if you if you liked the look of the pergola you could design something that had wood post had wood fascia around it but it just had like a single ply membrane roof so it sort of from the outside looked had the character you want but then it just was sort of solid okay yeah are you wanting light to come through I would like light to come through you want we want some light we want covered like basically covered light gotcha I gotta okay never mind CU I've seen some of those but they look really dark I mean so so I think what we could do is approve with a condition that the acrylic be eliminated and that gives you the the ability to move forward with you know kind of prepping for installation of a structure um and then you could continue to research options for the roof or other types of structures and come back and either revise the approval for the perola if you find something that you think is going to work for you and that we can that we think would meet with approval well I guess I've been unable to find a material that's transparent or translucent that does meet the guidelines I mean I'm not going to put glass out there I think that would be a nightmare from a hail standpoint so yeah and I really don't want a solid roof yeah so like to me that kind of runs like we want coverage but we want it to be like open and be being outside beside besides the fact that the guidelines don't allow for it what is The Logical reason that we that it doesn't um if it's pretty minimal visible and yeah I mean I think part of it is is a materials thing that the guid and it goes back to the green guidelines and them being sustainable that we don't allow for plastics for acrylics vinyl um all those types of products um there's concerns about what happens to acrylic if there's a fire if it melts um and kind of environmental impacts it's more the um sustainability environmental concerns so I I think we're still kind of at the same place we were earlier we would approve the taller pergola without the roof covering but then that would give you some time to go back and figure out if there's anything else out there and then you also may decide that you just don't want to do it because the roof covering just doesn't work but that would be your decision at that point too K you could pursue a modification to your ca once you got it if you I'm Sor provided a detail or something right yeah I'm sorry I was saying um if you wanted the approval to start and then continue to research the end solution that you want you could always modify your ca okay at a later date how do you feel about that direction I'm okay with that I struggle a lot with like the actual logical applic of that so I could build a pergola a tarpet so that looks terrible that's temporary and provides like the same thing it's kind of the same concept as if your Brick's already painted you can paint it whatever color you want if you want to paint a bright pink that's up to you but your house is going to look terrible so I mean I I get that that's your call yeah yeah I think that the demonstration would be I I think what the commission doesn't want to see I'll speak for myself um is a pergola with a for lack of a better term something that looks cheap that's just sort of set on top so if that's the functional um and I think the other issues with that acrylic is what does the uh solar degradation look like to that material and how long does it last and at what point does it start to degrade yeah um all things that you would research on that material selection we did I think from the commission standpoint if there's a way to conceal it where it doesn't look like we just slapped and and I'm thinking of the old like uh fiberglass translucent panels I think that's what we're trying to avoid aesthetically so if there's a way to detail it where it's sort of like if your uh Edge boards are taller and it sort of sits into the structure instead of so extending if we did Edge boards that inet and hid that would that be appropriate if it was designed such that debris and water could go could go off I mean that's always a concern mean I guess that's a question for the commission to me that makes it more yeah I don't want it to look cheap I mean sure we spent a lot of money here to to not have it look cheap so I personally think the challenge we're going to have is precedence because there's been so many people that we've said no you can't do this with and we haven't helped them come up with this Creative Design yes and I I just say to say that again yeah staff staff has told people this kind of thing that okay so are you guys comfortable with this direction yeah a concerned citizen that wishes to speak quickly as part of the say your name and address for the rec Holly Hunt Sam gam Architects 400 Northwest 23rd it's just as I've been hearing this I understand exactly what you want a traditional uh material use would be like using a very thick canvas but now they have make very good um liquid applied moisture sealants and so you know that I think is more what they would feel comfortable with whereas acrylic is just not part of these guidelines so it's not that there's no other materials but I know how we all I think struggle with that with HP is like building materials progress we all want to the best for longevity but they are still beholden to these so as an option canvas seal I'm a chemical engineer by degree well there you go he knows better than me I would say that the in terms of like a seant those are artificial chemicals too those are made from petrochemicals applied to fabric longevity is not going to be any different in fact it's probably going to be less you're talking about a thinner application it's going to have less structure it had to be a liquid to be applied to the the the cvas I happy to do that if that's what would but when I actually apply a logic to the situation like that's where I struggle with that so I mean I would be completely happy if we could just rage The Edge Board to conceal the visibility of it again I don't want it to look cheap if it starts looking bad we will replace it I mean that's I just think a staff is happy with um you know you come back with a different detail around the edge and we can't see it and they're fine with it I'm cool to approve with that condition I think we're I think staff's okay with that if you are good we conditionally approve that yep I think STA and if if for some reason we can't get on the same page on that detail we can bring it back to you guys but I think that's fine okay so what's that can so what are we saying uh that this that they that the applicant would bring the designs back to staff and have them approve the look and feel of what it's going to be going forward okay so we're so we're we we want to move approval with conditions withs the acrylic is hidden within the structure of let me just try this I yeah I move approval HP sorry does it matter that I mean visually I mean you'd be able to see it from other structures that's my only concern because you you're on Hudson yes yeah I think the benefit and what you'd probably want to demonstrate is with a pergola with sliding and the depth of your slidding if it's on top and you can't if you're protecting the the sight line from the outside which is what the Edge Board does and then the patterning and the directionality which you're going to want to consider your solar angles obviously y but also that if they're running parallel to the street then you don't have the visibility with the with the brick wall yes to see through to see it at all from the public right away I think that's the home run to me okay yeah this that Mak sense yeah I wouldn't think you'd see it from the street I mean I think you could find a way to conceal that it's just uh on the precedent if your neighbors can see it from their upore upstairs I don't remember but that's air rights right what's that that whole air rights thing like you know you can build a pool in your backyard and if it's not seen from the street it's fine but like neighbors can't be mad about it if they see it from their second floor window kind of a thing well except for we're making an exception to approve something that's not normally approved that we've denied before but I think our purviews on what it does to the character from the public right away would be my my opinion I just want to bring that up unless you had a neighbor that was super mad about it then I was trying to remember who's on that side of Hudson on your other side one so directly behind me um do you have the aerial view their way back nobody here to protest yeah they I mean we have like a two and a half lot house so yeah it'd be there Phillip which I know him really well he's if he had an issue he would come talk to me and then across the street I don't know that you would you you wouldn't be able to see it from over there okay no I mean Philip would be able to see it because he's got a second story house and has Windows that face my backyard but let's see do we have any other citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project let's hear a motion I move approval of hpca d2400 z11 item one with specific findings as listed in the staff report we're going to have a unique circumstance on the height correct yes to go above that N9 ft and then in my dropping condition one yes acrylic panels be eliminated detail or modifying that to the condition condition that the acrylic be concealed with details submitted to staff okay okay yeah I'm sorry as what Katie said yeah I think I was just clear because I I I thought we were just leaving it open that a modification can come back to staff in case there was anything else is is it specific on that acrylic your motion it is I think that's what everyone had landed on but I I I was just motioning that there was a unique circumstance on the height and I thought we could just get this project moved and that there is an alteration that comes for a different design to seal that top it could be administratively approved by staff with the correct documentation yes I'm not exactly saying what the applicants going to do because he might turn around tomorrow and have an aha moment go oh I need to do this do we need to list out what the unique circumstance is for the height so the slope of the do what can you specify what the unique circumstance is perhaps what the of the slope I'm sorry yeah the unique circumstance on it has to do with um the location the location yeah I'm sorry I missed that one where it is on the property because you have an overhang that's it's the elevation of the of the first floor relative to the patio so there's our our patio outside's actually like halfway up the basement so there's a 4 and 1/2t or about a 4 foot elevation the due to the elevation current elevation of the home yep let's go with that thank thank you everybody who have a second move by commissioner Milner second by commissioner gains please vote and Prime go okay that motion passes unanimously thank you all right moving on to item number nine hbca 2413 at 1528 Northwest 36 Street this is putam Heights word two consideration and possible action on application by Miles Mixon revive design build for Tad Burgess for certificate of appropriateness to one construct rear addition elective um staff had no concerns with the addition itself the only condition on the staff report had to do with just some materials that needed to be more fully documented but the addition is compatible with the historic structure it's within the guidelines for size height materials Etc um to the extent that materials have been defined I guess I should say but we don't have particular concerns about those based on what we have available to us and um yeah we recommended approval with condition okay before we jump into it are there any citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project okay good so staff has recommended approval with conditions and the conditions that they just need more information can you get that information over to staff yes okay I'll make a motion for item one on hpca 2413 with the conditions and specific findings on the staff report who we have a second second move by commissioner po second by commissioner Milner please vote in Prime go never let it be said that we're not efficient I didn't even get the chance to State my name you stay your name and address for the record since we 515 Northwest 42nd perfect thank you well it hadn't passed yet so we'll see how it's going to go here in a second thank you Taylor it's commissioner to you good luck luck with retir by a vote of seven to unanimously all right let's go on to item number 10 hpca 2414 at 216 Northwest 35th Street this is edir Park word two consideration of possible action on application by Holly Hunt Sam gram architecture for Chad Brown for certificate of appropriateness to uh one replace and widen driveway elective two demolish garage elective three demolish Playhouse elective four construct new garage and attached Cabana elective five install pool mechanical equipment and hot tub elective six install artificial turf elective and seven install driveway gate elective um staff did recommend approval of the demolitions for the garage and the playhouse we also recommended approval of the driveway and the driveway gate one thing I want to note with the driveway gate and we just just want to put it on the record the gate does not connect to a fence which is kind of an unusual configuration there's no fence on the side of the gate so it's not actually enclosing the yard um if at some time the homeowner a future homeowner wants to install a fence that comes up to connect the gate and enclose the yard it would need to be transparent up up to that 40% setback Mark where the um fence is supposed to be located um but other than that the gate meets um the criteria for a fence or gate in that location um staff did recommend continuance on the construction of the garage and attached Cabana uh the pool mechanical equipment hot tub and artificial turf um the garage Cabana is um larger than the historic structure that was there um this combined with the pool combined with a previously approved addition puts them over on lot coverage so just concerns from staff about um basically size of structure size of other features being added to the site and lot coverage issues how much over um I don't know that right at this moment um you have that we've got it it should be in the staff report how much over are you on lot coverage uh 13% 13% and and we're going to address that most of the day actually if I may or or is it my turn I'm sorry if you say your name and address for the record hello everyone um well I am thrilled with items one two three and seven didn't say your name and address I'm sorry I did earlier do I have to again yeah you got to do it again H H same gex Northwest or 400 Northwest 23rd Street hello again everyone thank you Commissioners for brevity's sake I have a a plan we're I'm thrilled with one two and three and seven recommended approval items from staff we are willing to work with those condition items each and every one with staff so if it's okay with you all since we've had a long day we're going to get to uh the the continuance items and um beginning with coverage okay so you all know me I I do not bringing you all something I don't think is approvable within the guidelines okay to that point this site coverage has nothing to do with HP guidelines I want to make that extremely clear and only in the last few years I've been doing this since 2015 here but I used to do historic preservation projects in Norman right after college for many years and I will tell you this has only really come up in the last two years this side coverage and they use it as they say the words recommended and reference but then here in most of these specific findings that's the only thing that we can talk about on most of these items okay there is no coverage rule in the HP guid and there's a good reason you know the R1 zoning ordinance was established when most of these properties were already half a century old okay they have nothing to do with this type of development okay I want that to be incredibly clear because staff I think is references Green Space the the guidelines reference green space and that is very important but that most of the time I believe is about the streetcape about the setbacks about the front facades and and maintaining that historic corridor okay that that is sacred I would never come in here with a proposal to change the front of a house um it's just I know that that is not what we're here to do so I feel like the guidelines in and of themselves like leave that back back of the house hidden from that streetscape as the only real freedom for modern development okay for these homeowners and it's important that we make it allowable for homeowners to maybe have a pool or maybe have a little extra in the backyard as long as they're meeting the criteria the guidelines that are set out in black and white because that's what matters right but these are those gray areas where I think it was intended that way so that we could make these properties you know um very pleasing for many many generations um so you know again coverage wasn't included in the HP guidelines which is the only zoning ordinance you need to think about out for these properties because it didn't fit did not fit if anything I mentioned Norman so Norman HP districts do have a coverage uh barrier and that's 65% and a lot of that the only reason that exists is because they have a very low flood plane and drainage storm water drainage is a horrible issue there okay so that aside but just to give you an idea of what coverage in historic districts looks like 65% if we're going to talk about it it's more realistic to talk about 65% than 50 it's my point because it fits better with a historic district okay so um that being said I the garage and Cabana yes I understand the garage is a little bigger than that 750 but I the whole whole point I really want to make here is from the historic street view we have a single story garage that that's what the streetscape view is the whole Cabana isn't even visible and again I think that's why there's these gray areas in the guidelines just to allow for some manipulation to the historic flow without disrupting that historic Corridor and I just I think you know we're happy to I'm I'm okay with the continuance today because I want this feedback to know what we can bring back that is approvable but I want you to know even today other than the 450 black and white rule on garage which we're just slightly over um that's the only unapproved item you'll see on my application by according to the guidelines so I really try to adhere to these because I know you guys are beholden to that I'm not trying to ask you to do flipflops or see and tell you you ought to care about Oklahoma City development no one cares more than us any comments from staff go please yeah you've heard it thanks on on her um I'm looking because we do specifically address we don't have a percentage for lot coverage but we do have language in the guidelines that says do not substant and I'm not finding it of course I'm scrolling um but it says essentially do not substantially alter the built to open space ratio which include structures as well as paved surfaces driveway sidewalks patios Etc um I mean I would say historically no home meets this 50% coverage that we're suddenly adhering to the and that that is I mean we are looking at um we're looking at what when we look at a prop a historic property that has not had a lot of additions to it what's the lot coverage a lot of times those are well under 50 and then we're using R1 as a basis because that's clearly been established and in place for a long time Citywide for neighborhoods that are comparable to HP neighborhoods as far as the development pattern that that's been um manageable so it's a .

5.37 is not appropriate to alter the overall character of the historic districts by substantially reducing the ratio of open space to built space on any site through new construction additions or introduction of surface Paving or other Hardscape features so that's where we have the I would open space and built space are are disparaging because you guys calculate site coverage based on even concrete even my driveway counts whereas if we could look at 50% coverage as far as building coverage rather or have some other way of looking at it because I I feel like it's only normal to have you know Paving around your home or have a back patio maybe that doesn't contribute to the overall open space that we're trying to get at you know if it's flat and it's it's not imposing your neighbor's View and or if you can still provide like in this proposal we have a fully permeable surface around the pool we can plant trees right up to the pool as long I mean certain types of trees of course that won't impede on the foundation but you know what I mean like open space is different than putting a concrete slab or a piece of gravel on the ground so I think there's some I I just to me that's not a reason to look at a a pool in the backyard that no one even is going to see that's actually very modest um to say no to that just because of some like zoning ordanance has nothing to do with this District yeah and I think it is it's not a regulation it's not something where you have to go and get a variance um it is one of many factors that staff looks at and that the commission considers um in the cumulative effect of how much are we building out a site well I think I've said what I'm going to say I'd rather just have some feedback I'm fine with the continuance I want to hear like what we can do what y'all's feelings on what the staff's findings are and how we can get approved my I I agree with all most of what you have presented um and I think think there different Commissioners have different stance on this my stance has always been on the 50% lot coverage that it is not a requirement that it does the intent of it is is trying to satisfy two things in my opinion one is storm water management of course so if you are over the 50% me if I were making a case for for a proposal that was over the 50% I would demonstrate what the strategy would be for the modifications and how that would potentially impact the Neighbors in the storm water management the second is if you're building um accessory dwellings or things that are already going to be mitigated by minimums that you're not building out the massing of the site so that it's visible from the public right away I would argue even though by the letter of the law a swimming pool is coverage I would argue that that's detention uh A A detention structure so um it can't detain water if it's filled with water it can it it's six 6 to 8 Ines over the footprint of it will detain water before it's 20 second rebuttal of course with a pull install you're doing linear drains and we've already spoken with the homeowner about running all area drains to the street dis uh discharging at the street elevation which is much lower than our backyard and know the staff report talks about massive excavation none of that will occur here we have incredible fall to the Street um so so for me those are the unique circumstances of how you're mitigating storm watch storm water potential damage to adjacent properties would be I couldn't agree more yeah yeah I would also like to add that like 50% is a gray area we have routinely approved 53% 55% before um 13 feels like a little bit more and then also you know your garage footprint is almost triple the size of what it was existing but it's not a guideline how can you use that as a Brant parameter for your approval when in an appeal it would never hold up because it has no bearing on this District if the garage met the requirements then I think I would be comfortable with I think I think yeah it's just that there are multiple things that are so much more over what the guidelines and what we typically go by that's what I mean as long as you guys are all willing to throw out this 50% baloney I think then we can talk about the size of massing and and how really we need where we need to go um because I would say that the Cabana is very common for these garage structures to have additional servants quarters we see it throughout the districts all of them some do some don't but it's an addition that is a gray area in the guidelines and I feel like it's the one area where you can expand in the backyard without changing the historic Corridor I think we should discuss maybe the other things and then we can get to the 50% baloney and see how that's affected there's an so we're just focusing on the site coverage and there's a couple other things that are probably a little more important and then we can back into what is that fair please please commissioner report tell me the other factors so I mean she she said the garage is is over what is allowed as 4 50 we're at 528 yeah we could probably scale that is well with the cabana it's 813 which is almost triple the size of the 300 foot structure that was there before yeah are different I mean to me that's separate it's it's one structure it's not a garage and a cabana or a garage and like um you know some kind of pergola attached to it like it's all going to have one connected concrete foundation it's one structure MH it is one structure but the square footage is calculated differently by the according to HP guidelines is all I meant I didn't mean to disagree it's just they are different differently I mean I we look at so the the guidelines about size for garages say garage we have had some cases where people came in that had a historic garage with attached quarters or office or whatever and we yes we have made allowances to say okay you can increase the footprint of the garage portion up to the 450 50 and still have the quarters at you know roughly the same size as what was there historically um we also make allowances for someone to build a garage and another accessory structure whether that's a shed or like you said a Pera you know other kind of outdoor space when I see one connected building I'm looking at the footprint of that building and I'm less concerned about whether it's a onecar garage and half of it is an office or three car garage or so I mean a building is a building and if the primary function is a garage I'm going to point to that 450 as that's your Baseline for what's allowed now prove to me that what you've proposed is still appropriate great so a detached accessory structure is sounding more appealing to the commission than an appri size garage I think as long as I think as as long as it all fits within the the sizing requirements and the guidelines we would take it all and say yeah we're going to look at this and consider it all but because there's so many different elements that are maybe above the normal size they need to be and some things that I think from ground some hardscapes or or some lock coverage issues we know we' talked about that but it's all contributing together well this this is the exact discussion I wanted to have I mean I expected a continuance on these items I would love to move forward with an approval today on the items we can and then perhaps come back next month uh what date do you want to come back to on um what are our dates is this our first that is shocking wow we've been making some decisions today are there any citizens that wish to be heard on this particular project it is April 3rd or May 1st wow okay it's 1 two 3 S when will they have to have be in by April next month sorry April 3rd you want April 3rd great okay I am going to make a motion to approve items one two three and seven of hpca 24014 with the specific findings and conditions in the staff report second move by commissioner po second by commissioner Whitley please vote in Prime okay that was passed unanimously one two three 1 two three and seven one two three and seven yes 1 two three and seven approved I will make a motion to continue to the April 3rd meeting items four five and six of hpca 24- z0014 second move by commissioner po second by commissioner Whitley please vote in Prime goove that was also pass unanimous ly those items were continued to the next meeting see you next thank you Commissioners thank you for still having some energy at the end of the meeting thanks OE all right moving on to our final item here hbca 2416 at 3118 North Hudson Avenue this is in edmir park word two consideration and possible action on application by Nicole Raglin for a certificate of appropriateness to one replace front lawn elective and two install landscape Edge elective um this is a application that you all are for the first time today and this is work that has been um undertaken um but must be reviewed as if it had not the um applicant has proposed to make modifications to the actual yard material and Landscaping itself and then also install a landscape bed in the front yard that exceeds the guidelines for height of uh landscape edging so staff has recommended a continuance um I believe the applicant has talked with um staff members about some modifications to that landscape bed um other concerns are um just the absence of traditional kind of landscape material that holds the yard in place and that contributes to the character of the block there are also city regulations regarding um landscape materials that come right up to or are within the right of way that can wash out into the street Etc it's not really an HP thing but it it may be a concern conern as far as a code enforcement matter okay can you please St your name and address for the record sure hi Nicole Ragin 3118 North Hudson okay and talk to us about where you're at with staff right now I know there's been some discussions back and forth but give us kind of your update yeah um well first of all um I plead guilty if that's even a thing um I'm new to the neighborhood and certainly new to HP so I was given a citation and then spoke with Angela um well aware that this is a giant gray flagstone iore we're not at all not even a fifth of the way through um the plan is essentially to put in Native grasses and drought tolerant plants as well as a flagstone pathway with um buffalo grass and um clover in between the stone um I totally understand and after having learning after we already had built the bed that at its point now I think is at 2 4 in and as I read it has to be under 18 in so I can actually cut it down to that height um and yeah so as it is obviously ugly and aesthetic is a very big thing I totally understand a photographer and filmmaker and aesthetic is very important um for the record I'm also a creative director for the Oklahoma Association of conservation districts and um certainly would love approval in this but also just want to drop a seed in intended to the fact that all of us need to be moving in the direction of drought tolerant plants flagstone if possible obviously that's very expensive um but native grasses so in terms of climate change in terms of um you know water retention building soil Health um eradicating completely as much chemical as humanly possible is extremely important so I just want to share that information so yeah yeah so Katie if this were reduced to the requisite height would this have been administratively approved I think we might have still brought it because the stone material and I think you all have talked about that too is kind of a typically we see landscape material that's compatible with the historic structure uh landscape edging and the stone material that color is a little bit off from what we would expect to see for this style of house if the height was reduced that may be less of a concern and certainly there's going to be landscaping around it that helps with the visibility of that feature um so yeah and also just when it like I said it looks like a giant big gray brick um I chose that color one it's hard to see in the photos but there are some cement blocks in the house that are that color um and then so that's right next door so those stones are going to be that color stone which is already similar to the stone that's already established in the front yard which is kind of an auburn red um the pl if you can see the little one in the corner there and then the big one next to that um upcoming Willow will be on the corners so once that that'll soften you know the big gray box as well as native grasses which will obviously be in the the warmer tones so um like I said it just it just stands out as it is we're not even remotely close in terms of design it's not my preference of color of stone but we also allow people like you said earlier to paint their house pink if they want to paint it pink and maybe not everybody so I feel strange telling somebody the color of stone on a temporary Landscaping get there especially when it's going to be covered by landscaping for the most part so I mean I think if if she can meet the guidelines as far as height and any other you know required guidelines then I mean I'm okay approving this with approval of submitting the information back to staff if that's I agree we I mean we also approved something similar like this the law project in Heritage Hills a couple months ago um I agree with you I'm not a big turf grass person I you know you could argue that this is actually the most historic for what was in the area you know your prairie grasses your native plants um you know so I will always um you know for the reason approve um something like like this I yeah agree with commissioner poor if we just drop that and um get staff anything else they need then I'm cool with this did I already asked any citizens wish to be heard do any citizens wish to be heard on this particular project can I ask should I speak up in favor of fescue grass or no I'm just kidding can I ask what the first item is being continued for because I think we're just talking about this the raise bed but there's also a continu in item one replace front lawn so so this is an area where our guidelines aren't as helpful as they could be um we have traditionally not really reviewed Landscaping because for a very long time Landscaping was somebody putting in a tree or a shrub or swapping out what was in their flower bed we are starting to see more of these kinds of projects where the entire yard is scraped clean and different materials are put in sometimes um sometimes it's you know a front yard of entirely Rock um or sometimes it's plantings sometimes it's um you know other materials so we have been trying to be more thoughtful be look more carefully at landscape projects like this to think about the impact on the character of the neighborhood just aesthetically um on whether or not there are any issues like I said with things that are going to spill over into the right of way um if there's decomposed Granite different materials of that nature um um and just the you know we we've talked in other meetings with other projects about the way in which a historic sod lawn kind of anchors features in place with the root system that's there and that's established and when you rip that out if you aren't very careful about what you put back it can cause damage to um you know the rolling Terrace of the yard if you have one or to steps in the yard or Paving in the yard to the foundation of the structure um so just kind of trying to be more cautious about that's right these kinds of projects I mean the uh the application you know she has this diagram of the root system of prairie plants which you know some of them are actually much deeper than your Fescue or your turf or anything um so if if there's like a specific you know rolling Terrace area you know we can always require more landscape Fabric or something that's going to hold that in place um and make sure that our edging down at the street level is tall enough that it's going to catch anything additional that was going to be my comment is on a flat lot like this and because of the applicant's background and knowledge and expertise it sounds like this is going to be done really well but you get an amateur out there who just cuts out their rolling Terrace saying hey my neighbor did this down the street or this other one I fear about the precedent setting piece of that going forward recognizing that it's also a good thing for Katie I'm just curious on because I am just trying to think if it has been rare if there were cases of an entire yard wanting to be the grass pulled up and Rel landscaped I don't know how many have come before in my time on the commission but what would a would a homeowner that had lived in the neighborhood know I guess what I'm getting is normally we don't have Landscaping come before us so I'm is trying to discern if the guidelines aren't too clear have we entered a gray area and how I think the guideline that is most applicable is about not modifying the Topography of the site okay and at some point when you're scraping the whole yard clean and removing the grass it's hard to do that without some change to the topography um so that's one of the things that we're looking for is when you're on make a condition um under the approval that like like the existing Topography is not changed or is changed as minimally as possible I think that is a good condition are unique circumstance can I offer something yes so we in Oklahoma our taxes will pay for a program called yard by yard this is actually through the conservation districts a con a consultant will come to your home and I can provide this I mean I can this can be like a derivative informational piece for you guys so that you all have it and every citizen has it and and we can all create a yard Revolution so um all of that is would be um part of that information because for one just so you guys know I'm not changing the slope of this like slope matters obviously in terms of runoff um and then teaching people that what it is that you integrate into the soil like I'm mentioning here when you create six- foot Roots you're making a massive like contribution to the neighborhood and the soil structure and the water water runoff and the eradication of chemicals and absorption of chemicals I mean this is why regenerative agriculture is essentially the answer to 99 of our 100 problems so anyway so that if if that is you know information like I'm happy to share that with you all you can have it we can put it in pamphlets and get it on doors I will literally walk them to doors to do this because I'm extremely passionate about it and obviously I'm doing it for myself and it's my work so yeah I have a question for Katie um about a potentially a very different potentially relevant um project that may or may not have come before commission uh there's a house on 40th Street in Crown Heights where the front yard owned by notable Gardener Linda Vader famous YouTube gardening personality where the front yard was completely removed the Turf Lawn and replaced with artificial turf uh so obviously a very different uh goal but the you know the the process is the same and did that go before commission and oh great cool did that come but did that come back through commission though I mean was there I I'm not aware of that ever having been sent to us so I don't know if they've had a citation uh seven to eight years I don't know if anybody ever did I mean it's always vaguely annoyed me but it's Linda vad what do you do she's got 500,000 Instagram followers I'm okay with a with a with an approval on this the applicant artificial turf if the applicant is willing to adjust the height on that um what I think would be really helpful for staff and unless if there's documentation that we have that's not in what's attached here in Prime this is what I'm seeing for a site plan and it would be really helpful if we could work with you and get this to have a little bit more detail and like dimensions and property lines just so we know if anything's going into the RightWay where the driveway sidewalks Etc are it's just not quite up to the level of accuracy that we typically would include in a CA and you don't need to pin down by the inch your plants cuz that's going to be something that I know you you get out there and you do it um you know but as far as Pathways landscape bed um curbs driveways sidewalks property lines um it would be helpful for us to have that level of detail to go into a certificate of appropriateness yeah and I think um and you'll do it because everything that um Tor said but I think where this goes off the rail CU there there are several houses that are unruly Lawns or um have Gardens or you know those types of things I think where it poses a potential nuisance is when those plants start to like come out into the public right away or cover sidewalks and um like there's a weeping willow that kills me every time on Walker but um anyway you're going to do it but that's just something to be said of of when it's done not well and that's what I think Katie's be able to see yeah what those plants are and where they are relative to the curb yeah we are noticing a trend in some neighborhoods of planting Cactus right by the sidewalk presumably to keep people from stepping into your yard but it's a little scary um if you are just legitimately walking down the sidewalk to be my kids ride their bikes past one and it is very uning so are you comfortable submitting a little more detail in kind of your site plan not the specific plants and stuff but like where the driveway is where the curb edges are you okay with that um yeah I guess I just need a little bit more clarity I mean yeah we can absolutely sit down and work with you on what to what we're looking for on that I'm not saying go hire someone to draw it up for you in AutoCAD or anything like that just a little more accurate detail of how this all sits within your property property lines and a few Dimensions probably just like drop it on a Google Earth image even we just do it together okay is that something that uh could would then need to come back before commission or is that something that staff would a condition that it's submitted to staff okay so on that note I will make a motion for hpca 2416 um item one with the unique circumstance that the the site is flat and it should cause minimal um erosion to replace with plants um replace the L of plants and item two that the um installation of the landscape Edge meets the required um Heights and that additional details on the site are provided dimensions and details are provided to staff and work with staff on that okay that work we have a second I'll second oh and what's What's the timing on that is that something we just work together via email yep so that's just a condition of the approval whenever you want to do it once it's done you'll get your ca there's no um deadline and you don't have to come back to us I mean not no deadline we don't want it we don't want to wait seven years but there's there's no like expiration I don't want to come back yeah okay okay move by commissioner second by commissioner Milner please vote in Prime go and I'm GNA come follow your clovers on your lawn because I'm you're I want to see your clovers and how I'm going to come check on it cuz I'm very INRI she going to do it herself right she's trying to get all the tips and tricks to come up here next time okay I will post neighborhood Gatherings there we go well thank you very much that item was passed passed unanimously we're now we're going to move on to item number seven which is other business item number a 2024 CLG application and I think we just need to recommend approval and authorize a signature on that correct yes so this is our annual Grant application that we submit to shipo every year um this is our annual Grant application we submit to shipo every year um to do things like intensive level surveys National register nominations host workshops Etc um so kind of the same same stuff this year happy to answer questions but it's a process we go through every year about this time so do we have a motion so I'll make a motion to recommend application for the grant and author authorizing signature for the application perfect do have a second second mve by commissioner po second by commissioner Whitley please vote in Prime goov okay I pass unanimously and the last thing well not the last thing item number B I was going to see you can I'll I would say the chair can decide I was going to suggest we switch B andc so that someone other than Taylor is the chair and can sign his resolution as chair um okay uh that would really be a good idea if you all want to uh elect a new chair first how do we need to go about doing that so um so would be item motion C elect officers we would need a motion to nominate someone to chair and then a second and then a vote can I make a motion do we need to do chair and vice chair so unless um Sarah can remain Vice chair unless we're electing her chair and you're comfortable with that election okay I'll make make make a nomination to um elect John Milner to chair excellent do we have a second sir moveed by commissioner po second by seconded by commissioner gains please vote in Prime goov it's not too late Taylor you're elected now it is and now you're up so now I can't make any more motions anything can I even though I'm no no long chair right now can she stay Vice chair since she's not stepping down she can stay but she needs to be okay I'll make a motion to elect Sarah Jordan or and have her remain as Vice chair do we have a second second move by commissioner por second by commer Whitley I hope she wanted to remain if not she got volun told she should have been here exactly no she I I contacted her and I would imagine she's watching on on uh YouTube or whatever we have this on an now it's really important yeah congrats okay uh that takes us through electing officers now we will talk about the resolution recognizing the Taylor fudge for his service you have to pass it off now oh over here man do I over there yeah May sit there and just help guide help guideance might he might need guidance use the G earlier because you're G to leave your you're to leave your language for him yeah it might be good if you leave we won't leave use for or anything oh yeah yeah substain okay so now we're moving on to other business Item B resolution recognizing Taylor fudge for his service on the historic preservation commission so um I will read this I hate reading these and I'll probably find a typo but um a resolution of the historic preservation Commission of the City of Oklahoma City acknowledging Taylor fudge for 5 years of honorable service on the historic preservation Commission whereas Taylor fudge has nobly served the citizens of this community as the commissioner of the historic preservation commission from February 2019 to March 2024 and whereas Taylor fudge graciously served as Vice chair of the historic preservation commission from January 2020 to March 2020 and whereas Taylor fudge graciously served as chair of the historic preservation commission from April 2020 to March 2024 and whereas Taylor fed's term as chair included the adoption of preserve OKC Oklahoma City's first Citywide preservation plan and whereas Taylor fudge's fulfillment of his responsibilities was achieved with a sincere dedication to the well-being of the community and vment of the historic districts and whereas Taylor fudge brought his personal and professional experience expertise in historic preservation passion for upholding fair and consistent interpretation of the guidelines and insightful consideration of the facts to his decision-making now therefore be it resolved that the historic preservation commission hereby Rec hereby commends Taylor fudge for his years of service on the City of Oklahoma City Historic preservation commission adopted by the City of Oklahoma City Historic preservation commission this 6th day of March 2024 so we need a motion and a vote to adopt the resolution and then I have a lovely form for all of you to sign I would like to make a motion to adopt that resolution all motion to adopt the resolution recogn okay well have a second okay I thought you gonna motion for yourself okay I love it motion by commissioner fudge we have a second by commissioner po everybody else please vote in Prime C I love it I'll pass it down if youall sign you vote for me [Music] below we'll look Nic that way okay okay so now we're on to uh Communications and reports uh item uh letter a excuse me administrative approvals so no action to be taken there um let us know if you have questions about any of those items um no withdrawals no withdrawals no administrative closings and nothing to report from Council I already noted the board of adjustment item that had been has been withdrawn and nothing to report at this time from Planning Commission okay uh anything from Municipal counselor's office uh I will not be at the next meeting I will be way on vacation good for you enjoy you want next meting yeah oh next meeting day uh the next regular scheduled meeting for the historic preservation commission is Wednesday April 3rd 2024 at 2m at the municipal building city council chamber new applications for this meeting were received March 5th yeah we're received March 5th 2024 new information on projects continued from today's meeting to the upcoming meeting must be submitted to staff by 4 P.M Tuesday March 12th 2024 the next regularly regularly scheduled work shop for the historic preservation commission is Wednesday April 10th 2024 from 11:30 a.m.

To 1:30 p.m. in the Embark L large conference room sweet B at 431 West Main Street do we have any items from Commissioners uh I was just going to ask I maybe I misunderstood from our meeting last week but I thought we were gonna announce today for the May meeting that we are going to talk about the guideline updates okay great we yep I completely forgot that we talked about doing that in the meeting um we'll get that on for the next meeting and we can send like an email blast to our okay our neighborhood list uh and just to reference you're considering with our Workshop yes last Wednesday right yeah yeah for the updates of the guidelines for solar and accessories well non worksh the non it was not a workshop it was not official yeah no form yeah we didn't that's right any other items from Commissioners okay any citizens to be heard there being none what is our Workshop in April can we turn we can adjourn at 5:21 p.m.

excellent.

As found on YouTube

Contact Us